


OF PR! 
NOVO> 1928 


“y > 
£1 9¢1g41, Ex 










¥) 
f 


4 


«ii 































Ur 
A 
P 
' 
iam i. ; 7 j 
LES ge ETE 4G SPE Pp em) Lit , ; : } 
vi wre eee iJ i \ 
‘eat cht “ i sara j ’ iv, 5 a 
ivi Sa a ee ’ +e : ; ae ) [ 
Ge RAR) ae f Tah a , Bi. 
, 4 7 ' i 
yr ive i (ht 
7 
} Te hay F 
} j ; 
vy j 
k ¥ ' 
We AKT t 
i road 
" ' if 
i's at 4 , ‘ 
bees} j 
a4 Va 
oe oh pa ! i 
atSs 1 et es ; = 
q, ae? ye 
#4 ) w 
, ) Pa aie an) i) 
, i f ) 
>a a 4 
4 ‘oy \ 
at 5 2 
a E he 1 4 1 
‘ - 
i i 
7 hare } 
is 4 ‘ 
9? stl i 
A ir ; 
} \ ‘ . 
i A 
ake : 
Vee eS Li 
é < i . - ~ 
ae | Vy ~ 
‘ ed r 
T ‘. 
. ! ‘ : 1 
‘ 
1 
i i 
j 
‘i 
i’ . 
b ent ee 
Uae 
J , \ ; vi : 4 
hil ae i " 
M ( 7 : } 
; i; 
: ‘ i] 
J ? 
ps i vf | i 
Wes atc eet 
cy) \ i) 
i 
i ; 
Fee REY tb 
{ ' 
r R i 
yt } f ¥ 
i 
i A 
. 
: ; 
iy Veo 4 J 
7 : 
) \ Sia 
i ; 
ou \x a 
p ; + Eh 
5 ' ‘ 
\ ec ais ‘ : 
er) t 
& : a : ’ 
i i } 
i - 7 
f .h ‘o ti f 
m4 By fa Thee t 
‘ hy eta rh y, ; 
a ee" F } 4 
’ POS | ‘ 
‘ ‘ Fit, wee 
w i ew, abe) } eae 4 
: i '¥ i : 
VA 
oft 
1 
’ " 
‘a 
Pers 
15) 
= ‘4 
hs rin 
kp 
i | + 
au + 
Ay) 
ar) ite 








rei J 
rh 1 ‘ia 


’ i 
SC 
47, PAU. Wit see 
if AN bed: 


fil 
ie 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2022 with funding from 
Princeton Theological Seminary Library 


https://archive.org/details/fromtribetoempirOOmore 


The History of Civilization. 


Edited by C. K. OGDEN, M.A. 


From Iribe to Empire 


The History of Civilization 


In the Section of this Series devoted to Pre-History and ANTIQUITY are 
included the following volumes :— 


I. Introduction and Pre-Hustory 


*SOCIAL ORGANIZATION . ; : ' : ; j ¥ W. H. R. Rivers 
THE EarTH BEFORE HIsToRY . ’ . : : j FE, Perrier 
PREHISTORIC MAN , 3 : : ; ; , ; . J. de Morgan 


LANGUAGE: A LiNGuIstic INTRODUCTION TO HISTORY 
A GEOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION TO HISTORY 


. J. Vendryes 
‘ p L. Febvre 
: 4 ‘ E. Pittard 


RACE AND HisTorY . 

FroM TRIBE TO EMPIRE , : 4 ; : ‘ ° ‘ . A. Moret 
*WoOMAN’S PLACE IN SIMPLE SOCIETIES. : ‘ é st J, ..ciyres 
*CycLes IN HIsToRY . : : : . . ; : J. L. Myres 


*THE DIFFUSION OF CULTURE 
*THE MIGRATION OF SYMBOLS 


, G. Elliot Smith 


: : 4 : ; : D. A, Mackenzie 
*THE DAWN OF EUROPEAN CIVILIZATION . : : ; V. G. Childe 


. 


II, The Early Empires 


THE NILE AND EGyPpTIAN CIVILIZATION . : ; ' : . A. Moret 
*CoOLOUR SYMBOLISM OF ANCIENT EGypt ; : ; D. A. Mackenzie 
MESOPOTAMIA ‘ : ; : ; ; : . L, Delaporte 
THE AZGEAN CIVILIZATION . ; : : : : ‘ ; . G. Glotz 


* An asterisk indicates that the volume does not form part of the French collection ‘‘ L’Evolution 
de l’Humanité” (of which the present work is No. 6 of the First Section), published under the 
direction of M. Henri Berr, Editor of the ‘‘ Revue de Synthése Historique.” 


A full list of the SERIES will be found at the end of this volume, 


From ‘Tribe to Empire 


Social Organization among Primitives and 
in the Ancient Fast 


By 
A. MORET 


Professor in the University of Paris, 
Curator of the Museé Guimet 





and 


GeeDANY 


Dean of the Faculty of Letters in the University of Dijon 


LONDON 
KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., LTD. 
NEW YORK: ALFRED A. KNOPF 
1926 


TRANSLATED BY 


V. GORDON CHILDE 


PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN 


CONTENTS 


PAGES 


FOREWORD. BY HENRI BERR - - - - 1x—-xxx 


PART I: SOCIAL ORGANIZATION AND THE 
PROGRESSIVE CONCENTRATION OF POWER IN 
PRIMITIVE SOCIETIES 


CHAPTER I: THE PROBLEM: SOCIOLOGY AND 
HISTORY - - - : F : i 1—10 


CHAPTER II: TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION - - 11—54 


1. The clans. 2. The phratries. Totemism and exogamy. 3. The 
classes and the regulation of marriage. 4. The system of kinship. 
5. Explanation of totemic organization; its principle at once 
social and religious. 


CHAPTER IIT: TERRITORIAL ORGANIZATION IN RELATION 
TO TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION - - - 55—63 


CHAPTER IV: THE FIRST TRACES OF INDIVIDUALIZED 
POWER WITHIN THE COMMUNISTIC TOTEMICO-TER- 
RITORIAL ORGANIZATION - - - - 64—74 


CHAPTER V: THE PROGRESS OF INDIVIDUALIZED POWER 
AND THE TRANSFORMATIONS OF THE COMMUNISTIC 
TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION. EVOLUTION IN MYTH- 
OLOGY AND IN POLITICS - - - - 75—84 


1. The data of mythology. 2. Determination of the field of 
observation. 


CHAPTER VI: THE CONDITIONS OF THE INDIVIDUALIZA- 
TION OF POWER - - - - - 85—113 


1. Masculinization of kinship and authority. 2. The potlatch 
and transformed totemism. 3. The potlatch and the confra- 
ternities. 4. Power, potlatch, and provisions. 5. Power, pot- 
latch, and property. 


PART II: FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


CHAPTER I: THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE AND 
POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS IN EGYPT - - 115—158 


1. The Eastern Mediterranean, the cradle of civilization. 2. The 
first human groups in Egypt. 3. The first historical period. 
4. The Thinite monarchy. 5. The theory of an Asiatic invasion 
of Egypt. 

Vv 


v1 CONTENTS 


CHAPTER II: THE EGYPTIAN KINGDOM AND ITS NEIGH- 
BOURS UNDER THE OLD EMPIRE - - - 159—186 


1. The alleged isolation of Egypt. 2. The Egyptians and their 
neighbours: races and types. 38. The foreign relations of 
Thinite Egypt. 4. The plan of defence of Memphite Egypt. 


CHAPTER IIIT: THE SEMITIC WORLD TO 2000 B.c. - 187—220 


1. The Semites and their habitat. 2. The nomadic Semites and 
their primitive institutions. 38. Elamites, sedentary Semites, 
and Sumerians in Shinar. 4. From kingdoms to empires of 
Semites. 5. Oriental politics in the days of Hammurabi. 


PART III: THE FIRST EMPIRES OF THE ORIENT 


CHAPTER I: THE IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS AND 
THE BARBARIAN EMPIRE OF THE HYKSOS - 221—255 


1. Egypt at the height of her power. 2. The Kassite and Hittite 
invasions of Mesopotamia. 3. The Hyksés invasion of Egypt. 
CHAPTER II: THE EGYPTIAN EMPIRE AND THE CONCERT 
OF NATIONS IN THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY ~- 256—301 


1. The Hyksés driven from Egypt. 2. The Egyptians in Syria. 
3. The organization of an Egyptian Empire. 4. The inter- 
nationalist policy of Amenophis IV (Akhenaten). 


CHAPTER JIT: THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE AND THE 
PEOPLES OF THE NORTH AND OF THE SEA - 302—354 


1. The Hittites in Mitanni and Egyptian Syria. 2. Seti I and 
Rameses II at war with the Hittites. 3. The Egypto-Hittite 
entente. 4. The Peoples of the North and of the Sea in the 
East. 5. From the Peoples of the North to the Persians. 
CONCLUSION” - - - - - - - 3855—860 
BIBLIOGRAPHY - - - - - - 3861—364 


INDEX - - - - - - - - 3865—371 


7 
wo es 


(su) 


pee aga pF a 


10. 
11. 
12. 
13. 
14. 


15. 
16. 
Ewe 
LS 
19. 
20. 
21. 
22. 
23. 
24. 
25. 


26. 
27. 
28. 
29. 
30. 
3l. 
32. 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 


. BOAT SURMOUNTED BY AN ENSIGN - = 
. CLAN ENSIGNS s as - = 


. THe ENsIGgNS oF THE FALCON AND OF THE 


EGyYptiaAN CLAN TO THE Hunt - - 
Eq@yptian REGALIA - « = - 
KiInG ScorRPION WIELDING THE Hor - 
SLATE PauertTE oF NARMER (OBVERSE) - 
SuaTE PauerTE oF NARMER (REVERSE)~— - 
AHA (MENEs) - - - - 
THE NAME OF NARMER COME TO LIFE - 


THe VouLtturE GoppEss (NEKHEB) AND THE ‘‘ 


SMA 


TAUI ’ 


AN EpiIsopE rrom Kina NarMer’s ‘‘ Sep’’ Frstrvan 


EGYPTIAN OF THE NortH - “ & 
EGYPTIAN OF THE SouTH x x & 


EGYPTIANS OF THE NORTH REPELLING A Nava RAID 


Dynastic Erocn) 2 ~ A 
Eaeyptian Types (Onp Kinepom) - - 
SMERKHET IN SINAI - 2 


Eayretian Suip (Otp Kinepom)~ - - 


SUMERIANS (FROM THE STELE OF THE VULTURES) - 


BAS-RELIEF OF NARAM-SIN - o " 
GEBEL-EL-ARAK KNIFE-HANDLE = s 


HittitE SOLDIER WEARING A BEARD IN SEMITIO STYLE 


ARRIVAL OF CANAANITES AT BENI-HASAN spout 1900 B.c. 


ASIATIC PRISONERS AT THE ProveH (E1r-K as) 
PRISONERS OF KUSH = 2 2 


EAST LEAD AN 


Eq@yptiaNn INFANTRY UNDER THE XVIIItTH Dynasty (DEIR-EL- 


BaHARI) - = “ y 2 
EGYPTIAN CHARIOT - s 2 a 
CANAANITES AND THEIR TRIBUTE - - 
A CANAANITE KHAZANU = a“ : 
THE CRETANS’ PRESENTS~ - a x 


PHGNICIAN SHIPS ON THE NILE at THEBES (XXTH Dynasty) - 


Wincep Discs ~ - - - 


AKHENATEN ADORING ATEN - 2 S 
Vii 


PAGE 


122 


123 » 


127 
131 
136 
138 
139 
141 
141 
146 
153 
157 
157 


162 
168 
175 
182 
201 
208 
211 
238 
244 
260 
260 


265 
267 
284 
285 
293 
294 
296 
299 


Vill LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 


FIG. 


33. 


34. 
35. 
36. 
37. 
38. 


39. 
40. 
41. 


46. 


Ser1 I, PRECEDED BY AMORITE CAPTIVES, IS WELCOMED AT THE 
Gate or Eaypr BY HIS SUBJECTS - - a e 


Tar ‘Princes oF LEBANON’’ FELL PINES FoR SETI I - - 
Hirrire AND SyRIAN PRISONERS OF SETI ] ‘ e @ 
THE SHARDANA IN THE SERVICE OF RAMESES II 


RamMEsEs IJ IN THE BATTLE - “= “= 7 e 


THe Hirrire RESERVES RESCUING THE FUGITIVES ON THE BANK 
OF THE ORONTES - i i 4 A ys 


THe EGYPTIANS STORMING DapPuR - 2 ¢ ‘ A 
Hittite AND SyRIAN DEITIES ~ - ae . i 


Tue Hirrire Kina AND HIs DAUGHTER ADORING RameEszs II 
(ABUSIMBEL) - - - - - - - 


. Two NEw ADVERSARIES OF Eoyrpr - - ~ = 
. A PHILISTINE CONVOY ATTACKED BY THE SHARDANA ~ % 
. Tur Ecyptian FLEET AND ARMY REPULSE THE ATTEMPTS OF THE 


PEOPLES OF THE SEA TO LAND - “ " = i 


. PHILISTINE PRISONERS - - . 3 é ‘ 


ASSYRIAN INFANTRY AND CHARIOTS IN Mountrartnous CouNTRY 
ON THE COASTS - A ‘ ai = b i 


. How tHE ASSYRIANS TREATED THE CONQUERED - » a 


LIST OF MAPS AND PLANS 


. ARcHAIC Ecyrpt - ps = 2 a " pe 


. Tue Ferrite CRESCENT OF THE ANCIENT EAST - - 


. SHINAR OR CHALDZA ai os ye Ee 2 “ 


. Tue Greatest Eoypr (MippLe AND New Kuinepoms) - - 
. THe ORIENTAL WORLD AT THE TIME OF THE EGYPTIAN EMPIRE 
. Tue Derinz or ALUNA AND MEGIDDO~ - - - - 


. THE Batrue or KaDESH - - - - - 


PAGE 


306 
308 
309 
313 
319 


321 
322 
330 


334 
337 
342 


343 
347 


348 
353 


121 
189 
204 
224 
263 
272 
317 


FOREWORD 
THE THREE PHASES OF SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 
I 


On several occasions in the first volumes dealing with the 
Evolution of Humanity we have met and touched on the 
problem of the social factor; here we face this problem 
deliberately and, as it were, come to grips with it. It is the 
social as such that this book essentially aims at introducing 
into historical explanation. 

That the study of the social element and of the function 
of this element belongs to history, that sociology 1s a his- 
torical discipline which, having taken its material from 
history, brings to history its results—that is our profound 
conviction. We are not unaware that to a certain type of 
mind it seems idle to ask whether it is history that embraces 
sociology or sociology that uses and transcends history; we 
believe that such are mistaken. The interpretation of the 
past is different according as sociology be viewed as a science 
which holds the key to history or as a science which explains 
it in a measure—even in a large measure—but not in an 
exclusive manner. 

Defined rigorously, delimited carefully, sociology in tts 
essence appears as a study of those ‘‘ institutions’? which 
correspond in social life to the functions in organic life; as a 
study of the structure of societies; as a study, finally, of the 
relations which ewist between functions and structure and 
also between the several functions. It is abstract and com- 
parative, since it isolates elements derived from history at 
different points in space and time in order to compare them. 
And after elaborating these elements it gains for the use of 
history a system of necessities or laws. It separates out and 


studies one important factor in human development—social 
ix 


x FOREWORD 


organization; 1t does not deny the existence of other factors. 
It furnishes a capital contribution to the historical synthesis ; 
it is not the historical synthesis. 

Among the sociologists who have formed a more ambitious 
conception of their discipline and have revived certain of the 
errors of the philosophy of history a distinction must be 
drawn. There are those who have assigned it too vague a 
character and have amalgamated heterogeneous elements 
without determining the social with sufficient precision. On 
the other hand, there are those who, having accurately 
defined the nature of the element, have only been wrong in 
exaggerating its importance and wishing to reduce everything 
to tt. 

The bases of positive sociology have been laid in the 
French school of which Emile Durkheim was the founder 
and for twenty-five years the undisputed leader.1 We have 
often expressed regret that this mighty spirit, who ewerted 
an almost dominating effect upon his disciples, did not ewer- 
cise outside his own group as much influence as he deserved 
and did not succeed in establishing sociology finally as a 
science. We believe that what has prevented his complete 
success is the philosophic tendency, as a result of which— 
despite his desire for a positive science—he exaggerates, or is 
inclined to exaggerate, the importance of the social. But 
perhaps that exaggeration is connected with a too a priori 
conception of positive science. For Durkheim and his school 
it 1s anti-scientific to admit action by the individual; the 
objective explanation by means of social necessity must be 
pressed as far as possible; and if we reach an individual 
remainder we should yet preserve the hope and even the 
desire of a complete explanation through the social. Now, 
the fanaticism of science, and only science, is dangerous ; 


* On Durkheim see Foreword to Vendryes’ Language, p. xv, and our 
own Synthese en Histoire, pp. 124-127. G. Davy has published articles 
on the man and his work in the Rev. de Mét. et de Morale, March-April, 
1919, January-March, 1920, and a volume Durkheim in Les Grands 
Philosophes Francais et Etrangers. 


FOREWORD XI 


science is bound, not to obey concepts, but to adapt itself to 
the nature of things. 

We have remarked that in his works Durkheim often 
made reservations upon his theses, and with a ‘* doubtless ”’ 
made concessions to reality, concessions which he imme- 
diately withdrew by a “ but.’’! We recognized that the 
sociologist has the right, and that it may be in the interests 
of science, to press as far as possible the explanation through 
the social; but we demanded that writers should formally 
confess cases of intractability to such an explanation and 
resign themselves to the complewity of the real. In his 
passion for truth, Durkheim, although his inner conviction 
might not have changed, and though his assertions sometimes 
continued to overstep the bounds of his evidence, ended what 
was destined to be his last work with phrases of caution. 
** It 1s proper to inquire whether that which in the individual 
transcends the individual, do not come to him from this 
supra-individual reality given in experience which is society. 
In truth none can now say how far these explanations may 
extend and whether they are of a nature to abolish all 
problems. But it is equally impossible to lay down in 
advance any limit which they must not overstep. What 
is necessary is to test the hypothesis, to submit it as 
methodically as possible to the control of the facts. That is 
what we have tried to do.’”? 

Our collaborator Davy, more than anyone else in the 
group about Durkheim to which he had the honour of 
belonging, maintained a wise reserve. He recently presented 
his remarkable book on Sworn Faith (La Foi jurée) as an 
experiment instituted to explain the formation of the con- 
tractual bond;* this experiment (the term, however, here 
takes on a rather peculiar sense) consisted in illuminating 
the obscure regions and supplementing the missing links in 
history by ethnography, in seeking in the study of so-called 

* See La Synthése en Histoire, pp. 170, 174, 198. 


* Elementary Forms of Religious Life—last lines in book. 
° See pp. 14, 18; cf. p. 3 in this book. 


xii FOREWORD 


primitives the possible or probable origins of institutions 
which history presents in a very advanced stage of evolution. 
By combining ethnographical data with certain historical 
survivals, interesting and legitimate hypotheses can, without 
doubt, be formed. The first part of this volume, conceived 
on this plan, will show what may be expected from that side. 

But theories based on the consideration of primitive 
societies are, in some minds, connected with the theory—if 
not the conviction—of the pre-eminence of the social factor; 
and from the point of view of historic synthesis some pre- 
liminary remarks on primitive man and the question of the 
origins of society seem requisite. 


II 


Davy uses the word *‘ primitive ”’ only with caution. Are 
the Australians or the Indians with whom he is concerned 
primitive or decadent? Are they still in their infancy, or 
have they relapsed into infancy? He raises the question; he 
does not decide it.! In fact, however the issue ought to be 
decided, there is no objection to seeking in their institutions 
the conditions which theoretically prepare and explain such 
institutions in history. G. Davy at present limits his task 
to that. 

But when it is desired to explain human evolution as a 
whole and in its essential factors, it is no longer a matter of 
indifference whether the savages be primitive or degenerate. 
The problem is no longer immaterial. By not facing that 
issue and making it the starting-point in the study of 
*‘ primitive man’s’? social organization, there would be a 
danger of encouraging those who e«alt social constraint, 
which is so powerful and so striking in such human groups, 
into something primary and, as it were, immediately given. 
We suspect, indeed, that Durkheim and his strict disciples, 
if they have not been induced to devote their attention chiefly 
to primitive society by their superstitious belief in the social, 


* La Foi jurée, pp. 16, 30. 


FOREWORD Xi 


have at least been confirmed in their superstition by the 
character of such societies.' 

** Primitives’ are not always degenerates; but it must 
not be forgotten that they carry the burden of an immovable 
tradition. Various circumstances—above all, geographical— 
have placed them outside the current of civilization; we shall 
see them appearing late upon the stage of human history. 
In the course of the discovery of the Earth when civilized 
peoples will undertake the conquest of new worlds, they— 
the heirs of a prolonged effort of social organization and 
intellectual activity—will here and there come into contact 
with such ** uncivilized ’’ peoples whom remoteness and isola- 
tion have, as it were, anchylosed in secular routines. Let us 
not imagine that, through being off the main routes and 
strangers to collective effort, they have been kept in the pure 
state of *‘ primitiveness.’’ The life of Pompei has, so to 
speak, been preserved from time, thanks to the ashes of 
Vesuvius. - Time has passed over the savages; and wmmo- 
bility in time is something quite different from an immobility 
which 1s, in a sense, timeless. 

So-called primitive societies resemble the most perfect 
animal societies in the rigidity of their organization. ‘* The 
individual from the moment of his birth is the prisoner of 
the group to which he belongs, which imposes upon him its 
customs, its beliefs, its manner of life, which obliges him to 
take a wife from a specific circle. The solidarity of members 
of this group extends to every domain;’’* it involves the re- 
sponsibility of all for the faults of one of their number, the 
responsibility of descendants for the faults of their ancestors. 
Property has a social character. The rites, in which all col- 
laborate, aim at ensuring the prosperity of the group. The 
social bond is indurated, and life, as 1t were, mechanized 
within the narrow sheath of institutions. Not only the 

+ See p. 111 in this volume. 

2 KR. Kreglinger, “ La Mentalité primitive’ in Revue de l’ Université 


de Bruxelles, March, 1921: See Revue de |’Institut de Sociologie Solvay, 
July, 1921, pp. 105-106. 


XIV FOREWORD 


activity of individuals, but their very thought 1s subject to 
social constraint—no less than to the burden of heredity. If, 
despite appearance, savages are not absolutely identical in 
nature and bearing, originality and initiative among them 
are reduced to the minimum. The young Australian, for 
instance, whom the elders initiate, *‘ becomes the living 
support of principles and techniques, the faithful repetition 
of which by successive generations guarantees their efficacy.”’ 
** No single attempt to alter the eaisting state of things has 
ever been made within living memory.’’ In this straitened 
and stagnant life of a small community the individual has 
not much more initiative than the kangaroo or the bara- 
munda. ‘* Forethought, regard for the future, those power- 
ful stumult to man’s inventive activity, are absent from his 
spirit, and in this respect he stands on the same plane as the 
other living creatures with whom he struggles for ewistence.’”! 

Too. much emphasis cannot be laid upon the fact that the 
term ** primitive ’’ as currently employed is inaccurate and 
misleading. More and more numerous are the ethnographers 
who on this point make reservations such as these: ** Are the 
uncivilized genuinely primitive? Is it not a veritable abuse 
of language to describe them by this term? For it is indeed 
vague enough, but it implies the idea of priority, suggests 
that they are nearer than ourselves to a state through which 
we must have passed, and consequently encourages us to 
seek in these barbarous surroundings the starting-point of a 
development of which our own civilizations are the culmina- 
tion. They are assuredly less cultivated than we, more 
simple, nearer to Nature; but it is not proved that they, too, 
have not evolved; they may be, and in many cases, as with 
the Pygmies and the Papus, are, degenerates. It is sheer 
carelessness to assume without strict proof that the develop- 


6 


* See Nadine Ivanitzky, ‘‘ Les Institutions des primitifs australiens ”’ 
(a summary of the observations of Spencer and Gillen, Howitt, J. 
Mathew, R. H. Mathews) in Rev. de I’Inst. de Soc., March, 1922, pp. 
178, 188, 192; cf. P. Van Wing, Etudes Ba-Kongo, Histoire et Socio- 
logie, 1921, p. 292. On primitive societies the Année Sociologique is a 
mine of information. 


y~ 


FOREWORD XV 


ment of humanity has always and everywhere been identical 
and in one straight line, the more favoured advancing a little 
farther on the path of progress, the others lagging behind 
and stopping in the first stages, but all treading one and the 
same road, the whole course of which the historian might 
reconstitute in detail by marking the points occupied by the 
belated.’”? 

The reader will note the double problem which is raised 
in the synthesis in respect of inferior societies if all precon- 
ceptions implied or suggested by the word “ primitive” be 
put aside. Do the institutional forms which they present— 
and by the help of which one might try to outline the scheme 
of social evolution—always mark a necessary stage? Or 
are they not, on the contrary, in certain cases anomalies, 
degeneration phenomena, or at least peculiarities? On the 
other hand, does a social bond, tightly fastened as it appears 
among them, offer an accurate picture of an original state? 
It seems to us that on this point of capital importance the 
answer may be in the negative. The so-called primitive 
societies, maintained and prolonged into our own times as a 
result of special circumstances, represent not the origin, but 
a secondary phase of the organization of society. And per- 
haps, in the light of all the data furnished both by the 
observable societies and psychology, the assumption is justi- 
fied that society passes through three phases, through three 
states; of these, that constituted by so-called primitive 
societies is the intermediate state. 

The terms we use show clearly enough that we are making 
no pretence of solving such an obscure question as that of the 
origins of society. We are on our guard against impairing 
the experimental character of this work by confident asser- 
tions. And we have emphasized “ society ”’ in order to draw 

* R. Kreglinger, ibid., p. 104; cf. Van Wing, op. cit., preface by de 
Jonghe. Primitive peoples, of course, are not all on the same level of 
‘“ primitiveness.’”? The checks to their growth may come about at a 
certain stage in individual “‘revival.’? That is exactly what allows 
Davy, with the help of ethnography, to conceive a process of society’s 


formation. 
b 


XV1 FOREWORD 


a sharp distinction between a theoretical evolution laid bare 
by abstraction and the complex evolution of historical 
societies. 


III 


Undoubtedly Society—as history shows it to us—is a 
reality sui generis; it has its own nature and laws. But can 
it be admitted that this reality has appeared fully formed? 
It is composed of individuals. What is the réle, the degree 
of dependence, of individuals in society? What are the 
degrees of variation in case this dependence has varied? 
That is the essential problem of sociology. 

Now, if the first forms of social organization, the initial 
groupings, elude our ken, and if we must beware of manu- 
facturing an etiological romance, it 1s scarcely credible that 
the principle of this organization should be to seek elsewhere 
than in the individual, in the social instinct of the individual. 

To understand the genesis of soctety it 1s well to dis- 
tinguish clearly between the mechanical effects of heredity 
and of imitation—they produce the similarity, the homo- 
genity of groups where the social principle is diffuse'—and 
the positive virtue of the social instinct. From the latter 
springs the solidarity which will gradually unite ‘* likes” in 
a close and lasting co-operation.” This potent motive, ‘* the 
attraction of like for like,”’ as it has been happily described, 
is more or less active among all animals.* It may be con- 
sidered a manifestation of the first principle rooted in the 
depths of the being, of the tendency which moves life—and, 
doubtless, matter itself. With the individuals a sort of 
superior individual tends to be formed. 

But the word individual must not put us on the wrong 


* See Introduction to Febvre’s A Geographical Introduction to 
History. 

* Condensation nuclei are produced in nebulous human beings, to use 
the ingenious phrase of Vidal de Lablache. 

* See La Synthése en Histoire, pp. 101, 128, 162. 


* See ibid., pp. 155-159, and our introductions to earlier volumes of 
L’ Evolution de |’ Humanité. 


FOREWORD XV 


scent. It has been justly observed that it denotes a mode 
of existence, a variable quality, and not an entity.’ The 
elements which constitute the social individual are not united 
in the same way as those ‘* thousands of millions of little 
beings’ (Cl. Bernard) which make up one of the higher 
animals. They form an association—not, doubtless, by a 
“ contract ’’—certainly under the impulsion of the instinct 
mentioned, but with a consciousness of the advantages of 
mutual aid and of the enlargement of life which it secures to 
them. Individualism is not “ congenital in humanity,’’? but 
society is not temporally prior to individuals; tt is made by 
them, thanks to appropriate states of consciousness. It is 
bound up with the progress of the psychism; like the latter, 
it tends to enlarge life. 

There is, then, an initial period of social organization 
when the unit is in course of formation in space and time, 
and when the development of the human individual con- 
tributes to its formation. If the hominide are social animals, 
sprung from species already social, we know how much the 
hand and language, those strictly human inventions, assist 
the social character—on the one hand by increasing the 
means of communication and union, on the other by per- 
mitting individual specialization and the division of labour,’ 
consequently by creating a complex solidarity (what Durk- 
heim calls organic’). 

The explanation is pressed closer home when one measures 
the importance of those kinds of crises which exalt the social 
instinct and at which the “ fusion of souls °” momentarily 
comes about. Under various circumstances, in the ceaseless 
struggle against animate and inanimate nature, in forced 
and voluntary migrations, keen emotions—terrors and joys 
wherein all share, common desires—create a sort of symbiosis, 


* Espinas, in that book, always so suggestive, Les Sociétés animales. 

* See below p. 111. 

* See the Forewords to de Morgan’s Prehistoric Man, and to Vendryes’ 
Language. * Division of Social Labour. 

° An expression used by Dr. Cureau in Les Sociétés primitives de 
V Afrique equatoriale, p. 383. 


XVIll FOREWORD 


renew those curious mental states which we call the crowd 
state.! That is a phenomenon of extreme importance which 
demands study—more study than it has hitherto recevved— 
in the light of documents for the past, and at present through 
the observation of the life of groups. 

It is from the “crowd state’? that social consciousness 
springs. But that consciousness outlasts the. circumstances 
which actualized the society. It survives in individuals—in 
such a way that their activity, even apart from such mental 
states, can respond to the needs of the new being which they 
are forming. 

It must not, however, be forgotten that society becomes 
corporealized. It becomes corporealized on the soil—where, 
above all, existence becomes settled—and among a host of 
material objects. By objectifying itself the sympathetic 
accord is consolidated and defined. 

Thus little by little the life of the group will be institu- 
tionalized; variety of functions will denote in it the needs of 
the social being taking advantage of differences of kind and 
also of degree in the “ qualities’”’ of the constituent tndt- 
viduals. These are, in fact, not all mere elements of society; 
among them there are social agents through whose conscious- 
ness the social current flows more forcibly and instantly until 
at length there are social inventors, too, whose deliberate 
initiative will tend to modify the social institution.’ 


1 See La Synthése en Histoire, pp. 166 ff. 

2 Very summary hints. We refer the reader to La Synthese en 
Histoire, pp. 172 ff. On the ‘‘ chief’? note some interesting reflections 
in Espinas, op. cit., pp. 520-521, and Cureau, ibid., pp. 325 ff.; even 
where no word is in use to translate the word ‘‘ chief,’ the crowd 
submits to the ascendancy of certain individuals. ‘‘ From its first dawn, 
authority is revealed as the resultant of the consent of those who are 
destined to submit to it and who certainly have given it to themselves.”’ 
In the institutional form individualized power emanates from society; 
but on the contrary in the diffuse form it constitutes society. Before 
the chief invested with power goes the ‘‘leader’’ just as before the legal 
family, arising out of society, goes the natural family. 

On the origins of society sociologists have given voice to most ached 
theories, often very a priori: an account of them will be found in 
Cornejo, Sociologie générale, chap. ii. Let us also recall the work of 
Cosentini, La Sociologie génétique, and note a book on this topic in 


FOREWORD XIX 


Too much stress cannot be laid on the point that society 
is bound up with the psychism. It profits by its progress 
and contributes thereto. In absorbing the individuals it 
develops individuality. Now, together with advantages, the 
development of the individual involves risks for society. It 
has the double defect of favouring now selfish calculation, 
now the spirit of innovation which generally awakens unrest 
in the organized mass. 

We therefore picture to ourselves the beginning as a 
moment of movement and progress in which the individual 
and society were generating one another—to a point when 
the society in process of organization and the developing 
individual clash actually or potentially. It is then. that 
the social being, to realize its nature fully, ewercises the 
maximum of constraint. Then, too, the enlargement of 
societies is accomplished by violence. Originally mutual aid 
must have been the dominant tendency among peers. The 
same attractions which brought together individuals must 
also have brought together little groups into homogeneous 
wholes' and established various relations and fresh unions 
between them. We would gladly believe ‘‘ war and its 
cruelties, cannibalism and slavery are relatively late phe- 








Ruthenian by M. Hrachevsky, known to us only from an analysis in the 
Rev. de I’Inst. de Soc. (Jan., 1922, p. 166). 

Let us also note some works which may throw some light on social 
origins. Varendonck, in his ‘‘ Recherches sur les Sociétés d’enfants”’ 
(Travaux de l’Inst. de Soc. Solvay, 1914), has remarked the transition 
from gregarious activity to organized grouping under a head. 

G. des Marez, in his Memoire to the Royal Academy of Belgium 
(Class of Letters and Mor. and Pol. Sciences, 1921) on La Premiére étape 
de la formation corporative, ‘‘entre aide,” allows us to behold the 
artisans attracted towards one another by the great laws of mutual aid: 
““they obey certain essential and profound forces which urge them to 
the path of organization to some degree unbeknown to themselves.’ He 
has also shown at work in towns which are coming into existence the 
sentiment of mutual defence which converts the mass of the citizens 
into a communitas, a communio, an individual. In all communal forma- 
tions the internal union is accompanied by exclusiveness and reinforced 
by conflict. 

> On this point see La Synthése en Histoire, p. 160, and L. Duchesne, 
‘‘ Lutte pour la vie et entr’aide sociale’’ in Rev. de Inst. de Soc., 
Nov., 1921, p. 355. 


= | FOREWORD 


nomena in evolution.’’' To posit itself finally, the group, 
while it imposes itself on what is within, opposes itself to 
what is without. ‘* The distinctness with which a social 
consciousness posits itself, a collective ego, is in direct pro- 
portion to its hatred for the stranger’? (Espinas). And war 
demands a strong social armament and tightens the bonds of 
union which have made it possible. 

In the evolution of society, then, there is, in our opinion, 
a phase—the second—of rigorous restraint, of compulsory 
**conformity.”? Bagehot, in an ancient work which still 
possesses a vital interest, had made some sage remarks upon 
those centuries of oppression which had been needed to con- 
solidate and to stabilize (status, State) human groups.” The 
weight of society is, then, so crushing that not only do 
institutions fetter every activity on the part of individuals, 
but the psychism itself becomes institutionalized. In previous 
volumes we have encountered this phase, in which technique 
is shackled, in which reason is paralysed, in which society 
interposes itself between nature and spirit.* 

Here, perhaps, the distinction drawn between those so- 
called primitive societies—taken, as it were, in the void 
without inquiry into their past—and the truly primitive ones 
will be found fully justified. The primitive in the strict sense 
of the word must have been endowed, as has been said, with 
** aptitudes for self-elevation’’: it was ‘* young ”’; it did not 
bear the ‘‘ indelible mark’ which “the long succession of 
ages has stamped upon savages.’** In societies which it is 
better to term lower or uncivilized, circumstances have in- 
definitely prolonged the period of stabilization; and certain 
characters of this period have been reinforced and ewag ger- 
ated by its long duration. The creative spontaneity from 
which the social organization has sprung has at length 
been stifled by this organization itself, and the initial 


 C. A. Ellwood, Principes de psycho-sociologie (1914), p. 102. 

* Physics and Politics. 

° Forewords to de Morgan’s Prehistoric Man, Vendryes’ Language, 
und Febvre’s A Geographical Introduction to History. 

* Fr. Cosentini, La Sociologie génétique, p. 26 


FOREWORD XX1 


enthusiasm of the spirit has been broken by the socializa- 
tion of thought. 

Most people are acquainted with the interesting attempt 
of Durkheim’s group, of L. Levy-Bruhl, and of others in their 
train, to define *‘ primitive mentality ”’ in its characteristic 
feature—that is, as fleeting and almost imperceptible. The 
primitive thinks, in a sense, emotionally. He lives in a 
mystic environment, in a world of occult forces immanent 
in the phenomena which he claims as the province of his 
activity; for nothing is impossible to desire. The region of 
mystic forces constitutes, ‘‘as it were, a category of the 
real,’’? which overshadows those of space and tume—in which 
phenomena are necessarily presented for us—which eludes 
the law of identity, and which is opposed to determinism. ' 
“The linkage between the circumstances which precede and 
the circumstances which follow after is not the one which 
interests lower societies; they rely upon pre-formed bonds, 
which alone offer them any satisfaction.” Facts seldom 
have ‘*‘ the power of undeceiving them or of teaching them. 
In an infinity of cases their mentality . . . is impermeable 
to experience.’”* 

It does not seem to us that such a mentality is primitive, 
that it is pre-logical, or that it is purely social in origin. The 
germ of it undoubtedly lies in a certain disposition in the 
individual to project into the outside world the life which he 
feels so deeply within him, and to interpret the real as a 
function of his own life. This spontaneous, affective, prag- 
matic logic, which persists to some degree even among civil- 
ized people, must exist in the primitive mind. But it must 
co-exist there with the beginnings of experimental and 
practical logic. Readers of earlier volumes will have learned 
to see that the normal development of humanity ts achieved 

* See Levy-Bruhl, Les Fonctions mentales dans les Sociétés in- 
férieures, and La Mentalité primitive; Durkheim, Elementary Forms of 
Religious Life; R. Lenoir, ‘‘ La Mentalité primitive’ in Rev. de Mét. 
et de Mor., April-June, 1922 (especially p. 204); L. Brunschvich, L’ Ex- 


perience humaine et la causalité physique, pp. 89 ff.; cf. La Synthese 
en Histoire, pp. 190-195. 


XX FOREWORD 


through this contact between the individual and the real, 
wherein the nisus which moves the individual profits by 
experience. Apparatus, material and mental, is essentially 
the product of individual invention. There is therein a logic 
in action which, like affective logic, is lived, but lived under 
the guidance of nature. 

Society encourages the spirit’s development and fetters 
it; tt fetters it in so far as it comes between nature and spirit 
in the manner described above. Its power is great enough to 
exalt to almost exclusive lordship and, under certain circum- 
stances, to maintain indefinitely so enthroned this sort of 
logic, which has been so well studied under the questionable 
title of primitive or prelogical mentality. In those * crowd- 
states”? it is affective logic that reigns. Now, in lower 
societies there are organized “ crowd-states’’ which “ with- 
the aid of movements, dances, rhythms, cries, formule, 
chants, and dramas,’ perpetuate and fix the mystical 
feeling of the social symbiosis and even of the universal 
symbiosis. 

It is, however, acquired eaperience which allows the 
individual to live and to provide himself with food and tools. 
‘There scarcely exists any society so low but we find there 
some invention, some procedure in art or industry, some 
handiwork to excite our admiration—canoes, vases, baskets, 
fabrics, ornaments, etc.’ But to the savage only the co- 
operation of invisible powers gives efficacy to the traditional 
processes. His confidence in formule and rites leads him to 
misunderstand the value of material means. He would not 
be incapable of innovation‘ but for the ** tyrannical con- 
formity’’> which oppresses him and which he accepts. So 
it is social life lashed into a paroxysm and kept in one that 
has produced the * impermeability to emperience.’? For 

* On the individual as agent in logic, see the introductions to Pre- 
historic Man, Language, and A Geographical Introduction to History. 


* R. Lenoir, op cit., p. 211; Dr. Cureau, id., p. 169. 


* La Mentalité primitive, p. 517 (cf. p. 350), and Les Fonctions 
mentales dans les Sociétés inférieures, p. 79. 


* La Mentalité primitive, p. 449. * Ibid., pp. 463-4. 


FOREWORD Xxill 


progress to continue, for representations and then concepts 
to be modelled upon things and beings, a plasticity is needed 
which the pseudo-primitive has lost.’ 

Durkheim’s school has done good work in devoting them- 
selves to the study of social states in which the individual 
is absorbed in the group—till a point is reached at which 
collective representations dominate his whole activity. As 
these collective representations involve a mystical interpreta- 
tion of man’s relations to his. social and natural environment, 
it must be recognized that in such states the whole ewistence 
of society and its members is immersed in religion. But 
when Durkheim makes—or tends to make—religion a funda- 
mental institution, the matria of all institutions, he 1s going 
too far;? religion does not answer the primary essential needs 
of society. It is because the psychism becomes institu- 
tionalized that at a given moment religion unifies spirits, 
envelops activities, and binds the social elements closely 
together, and with the world—visible or invisible. Thereafter 
all the social life, the whole later psychic development, will 
arise out of religion—by differentiation or liberation.* 


1 In the elements themselves even what seems most individual is 
strictly subject to society: ‘all kinds of oral expressions of opinion 

. are social phenomena, marked to the highest possible degree by 
a non-spontaneous and perfectly obligatory character”? (M. Mauss, 
“LP Kxepression obligatoire des sentiments’’ in the Journal de Psycho- 
logie, May 15, 1921, p. 426). It was the same in Ancient China as 
M. Granet explains so well in his admirable studies on psychology. ‘In 
the evolution of the sentiments spontaneity appears only at the end of 
an evolution through a reaction against the first formalism (let us say 
secondary; at the beginning there are pure reflexes as the Chinese 
ritualists themselves admit) and the developed ritualism of sentimental 
language—and only when society is sufficiently unstable to allow the in- 
dividual to perceive a discord between his ideal and the social organiza- 
tion. But in a stable society, which clings to its stability, 1f 1s by no 
means the originality of the individual or even family traditions which 
governs sentiment and its expression” (‘‘ Le langage de la doulewr 
@apres le rituel funéraire de la Chine classique’’ in the Journal de 
Psychologie, Feb. 15, 1922). There are societies which, like China, 
without being ‘‘ lower,’’ have suffered long periods of ‘‘ arrested develop- 
ment’? as a result of circumstances: see Levy-Bruhl, Les Fonctions 
mentales dans les Soc. inf., pp. 448-450. 

2 See Davy himself, p. 52 below. 

3 We shall have occasion subsequently to distinguish religion from 
magic. 


XXIV FOREWORD 


As a result of various circumstances, the period of 
stabilization may indeed, in the case of some societies, have 
been indefinitely prolonged. On the whole its duration is 
very variable. But in the case of the majority of human 
societies it has been transitory and, with the most favoured, 
it has been relatively short. A work, the aim of which is to 
study the evolution of humanity, 1s necessarily concerned 
with societies which have not become petrified in the simple 
and indifferent business of lasting. In the former the move- 
ment forward has not become exhausted. The need for 
being, and for the fullest possible being, has produced its 
effects. It has produced them in two different ways—in the 
society and in the individual. 

As we know, human groups are not in close dependence 
on the natural environment.+ They have launched out into 
space in the desire to better their conditions.” Some settle 
in a favourable habitat which they open up. Others, less 
fortunate or less ingenious or more restless, continue nomadic 
existence. We have spoken of that vital instinct which, while 
bringing some societies into a stable position, also sets them 
in mutual opposition. An eager ambition, a complex appe- 
tite, which, moreover, fastens now upon the wealth of the 
territory, now upon the physical and psychical resources 
which its occupants represent, hurls the nomads on the 
sedentary peoples, make the latter the prey, causes the one 
to drive out the other or to subdue and exploit them or 
to absorb them. Imperialism is inspired by the ‘will to 
growth **—a brutal will. It may assume modified forms, 
but in its essence it is the opposite of union for life. In 
society it is the egotistic, systematically egotistic,* translation 
of the need for the fullest possible being. 

So—through conflict as much as, or more than, through 
agreement—societies grow. They make more or less success- 


* See Febvre, A Geographical Introduction to History. 

* Ibid., Introduction ; cf. Pittard, The Races and History. 

* See Perrier, The Earth before History, General Introduction. 

“ In that respect it is a human invention rather than a natural law. 
See La Synthése en Histoire, p. 161. 


FOREWORD XXV 


ful experiments in their own organization and in the exploi- 
tation of the land which is connected therewith. Often 
success itself is fatal for them, attracting barbarians who— 
intentionally or not—ruin them. Sometimes it is their un- 
restrained ambition that is disastrous to them; they, like the 
monsters of prehistory, overstep the limits within which life 
is liveable. In whatever manner they dissolve, their elements 
enter into fresh combinations, which profit to some extent 
by the earlier attempts. 

In these struggles and absorptions of human elements, in 
these interchanges of influences, added to the bracing of races 
and the effect of diverse surroundings,’ not only does social 
organization develop and increase in compleaity, but the 
individual intensifies his psychic activity, enlarges his ea- 
perience of the real, and his power of logic. The personality 
of chiefs in whom power is concentrated asserts itself ener- 
getically. And, before it ultimately culminates in profound 
transformations of power itself, the increased value of the 
social units gives fresh momentum and acceleration to the 
progress of those technical inventions and mental acquisitions 
which are at the root of society, which society tended tem- 
porarily to fetter, and which at length will emancipate 
philosophy, science, and art from religion. 

It is therefore possible to speak of a third phase of social 
evolution—no longer one of spontaneity, like the first, but of 
liberty—in which the réle of the individual goes on steadily 
growing, and in which, by that very fact, far from its vitality 
being necessarily impaired, society is rendered more alive and 
more plastic. Social consciousness, in fact, persists in the 
elements of society: it 1s aroused at certain times and under 
the pressure of certain events; it is reflected in those indi- 
viduals whom we have called social inventors. 

Of course, it goes without saying that this phase, in which 
individuality develops and frees itself from society to the 
advantage of society, does not manifest itself as a continuous 


1 See theworks of Febvre and Pittard cited above. 


XXV1 FOREWORD 


uniform progression. Through the operation of various 
causes, there will be periods of social relawation and even of 
anarchy, to be followed by reactions, inevitable and salutary 
for the moment, and a return to authority and conformity— 
at least external—in which the social bonds will be drawn 
tight once more. The two conflicting principles—compulsory 
unity or a purposive and deliberate harmony—will be 
dominant alternately both in the realm of the spirit and in 
political life.* 

As far as intersocial relations are concerned, the same 
principles alternate in like manner. If human progress 1s 
achieved in various groups through the effort of distinct 
and often hostile societies, the result of reflection will be 
to regulate and draw close their relations. Through real 
solidarity and conscious logic, inclinations towards a stable 
alliance will more and more take the place of attempts at 
imperialist unification. And im a sense historic evolution 
would seem destined to culminate in a society of nations, in 
the organization of Humanity. 


We have not shut our eyes to the sketchy character of 
these considerations and their hunger for proofs, and, let us 
repeat again, we only advance them in the guise of an 
hypothesis. But in that sense we think it is possible to lay 
down a sort of law of the three states governing social 
evolution. And we point with pleasure to the fact that 
in this conception the essence of Durkheim’s sociology is 
preserved and assimilated. 

The reality of that rigid society which ewerts a sovereign 
pressure upon the individual, which moulds him wholly, even 
in the inmost recesses of his being, is admitted by us—but 
not as the first datum in history; appearing fully formed, it 
would be inexplicable in itself, and it would be impossible to 
understand how it should have produced all that is in contra- 
diction to or even in conflict with its own nature. | 

As far as the psychism is concerned, we have not only 


* See L. Weber, Le Rythme du Progrés, and R. Lenoir, op. cit. 


FOREWORD XXVH 


recognized the efficacy of social life in its development, but 
we have pointed out that it became institutionalized, that at 
a certain stage of evolution it is almost completely socialized. 
Nevertheless, we maintain the principle that society does not 
think, that its life is purely effective.’ And in the institu- 
tional we distinguish what is accidental in formation from 
what is in essence social. : 

We regard as primary manifestations of society, as 
absolute necessities, political, legal, and moral institutions 
originally undifferentiated, and which are only gradually 
differentiated, and economic institutions. Whatever be the 
functions of religion—infused through the whole of social life, 
socialized to the highest possible degree—we consider that it 
derives its first substance from the individual; and a fortior1 
we profess the same belief with regard to philosophy, science, 
and art; they answer primarily to human, not social, needs.” 
The formation of society and the formation of thought, these 
two connected processes, are of supreme importance for ex- 
planation; and whilst studying their relations the historic 
synthesis takes care to distinguish between them. Durkheim 
confused them in his socio-religious theory. 

Durkheim’s sociology has made an interesting attempt to 
establish relations between social necessities and the structure 
of societies. In proportion as the volume and the density of 
the latter are modified—that is, according as the number and 
distribution of social units varies (as urban life, for instance, 
develops)—so the institutions themselves, too, are trans- 
formed. That is a principle which we accept—but with the 
reservation that to explain the modifications of structure 
themselves it is necessary to introduce first the social logic,° 
and then all sorts of contingencies (above all, geographical* 
ones), and that, on the other hand, multiple contingencies 

* See_on the other side, Durkheim, Elementary Forms of Religious 
Life, pp. 441 ff. 

* See La Synthése en Histoire, pp. 208 ff. 

* For a discussion of Durkheim’s ideas on this point, see La Synthése 


en Histoire, pp. 139 ff. 
* See A Geographical Introduction to History. 


XXVill FOREWORD 


and mental logic exert a direct influence upon the institutions 
themselves. Thus only can it be comprehended why, though 
analogies in social organization do often coincide with analo- 
gies in structure, differences in organization also often appear, 
despite morphological analogies or, conversely, analogies of 
organization despite morphological differences.' 

Historic causality is complex. It is by studying without 
theoretical bias the interaction of causes of different nature 
that the historic synthesis realizes its programme. 


IV 


We have not given this volume the sub-title ‘‘A Socio- 
logical Introduction to History.’ We were afraid of suggest- 
ing thereby to certain minds the idea of a kind of externality 
—and perhaps of pre-eminence—of sociology in relation to 
history, and of advertizing a study of the social element at 
once more complete and more eaclusive than will be found 
here. 

In this work a very delicate problem is involved in the 
distribution of the themes, with the double end in view that 
we have to promote the truest possible understanding of 
human evolution and to reproduce it as much as possible. 
Our path is beset by the ever-present danger of falling into 
abstraction through the desire to explain, or into confusion 
through the desire to fia the concrete. From the point of 
view of explanation, it is upon the organization of power, on 
the relation of political institutions to changes in the struc- 
ture of societies, on the formation of what at a certain point 
of development is called the State, that attention is here 
chiefly concentrated. 

But we know that the various institutions are only 
gradually differentiated, and also that changes in structure 

* An interesting discussion at the Institut de Sociologie Solvay pro- 
voked by a recent work of Dupréel, “ On Demographic Variations and 
Progress,” brought out the fact that the increase in the volume of 


societies may be due to different causes and lead to different effects (see 
Rev. de l’ Inst. de Soc., May, 1922). 


FOREWORD | XX1X 


are connected with a multiplicity of causes contingent or 
logical. On the development of institutions other than 
political the reader will therefore find some suggestions here ; 
they will be elaborated and completed in subsequent volumes. 
And on the other hand it is within the framework of an intro- 
duction to the study of the civilizations of the Orient that the 
study of the social factor will be presented in concreto. 

Of the three phases of social evolution which our hypo- 
thesis distinguishes, the present volume refers to the inter- 
mediate phase and the beginning of the third. It is not 
content with collecting the little that is known about the 
oldest historical societies; it illumines these meagre data, as 
we have said, with the knowledge derived from lower socie- 
ties. In his valuable contribution G. Davy ingeniously 
utilizes the results of a long collective enterprise of ethno- 
graphic observation and sociological elaboration. He ea- 
pounds the naive complications of savages’ social life in 
action, and by a procedure solid rather than dialectic he 
follows the stages—not certain nor necessary, but possible— 
of the foundation of Power. 

G. Davy and A. Moret, mutually confirming one another, 
have recreated that mystical atmosphere in which society has 
developed from its humble origin in the clan. From clans to 
States, from States to Empires, the reader sees the unity 
which expands and the power which is individualized pre- 
serving their original character, even when the bonds of 
society are relaxed. We do not think that the history of the 
Orient has ever been treated with an equal keenness to trace 
in it the progress of social organization, the effect of a sort 
of internal impulse. That does not prevent A. Moret from 
showing the fullest appreciation of the multiplicity of factors 
which within groups contribute to the development of this 
organization, and of the repercussions upon society of the 
continual rearrangement of the human groups. 

Perusing it the reader is struck by the rapidity with 
which—after thousands of years of obscure and slow toil— 


XXX FOREWORD 


vast civilized societies were formed. He finds himself sud- 
denly in a world of high politics and conscious diplomacy. 
But such organizations are fragile especially because there 
exist vast reservoirs of barbarous peoples who overflow 
periodically upon the more advanced peoples. In such 
human convulsions the results of social progress frequently 
suffer hurt. 

The diverse races, the numerous peoples who have been 
responsible for the history of the Ancient East, are here 
presented interrelated. The outlines of this history with its 
wide ramifications are luminously drawn by a scholar who 
combines with profundity of erudition the gift of singling out 
the essential, whose interests embrace life in all its many- 
sidedness, for whom present and past are each guides to the 
comprehension of the other. We thus get, as it were, the 
assembling-board for the volumes to follow, which will be 
devoted to the civilizations of the Orient, and with which 
we definitely enter upon history equipped with explicative 
principles. 

We believe this book derives an original character and a 
complex interest from the close collaboration of a sociologist 
and a historian. The sociologist strives to set aside all 
prejudices, and admits that sociology turns into the ally of 
history: the historian is curious about sociological research 
and knows how to profit by it. By combining their know- 
ledge and their qualifications, in order to produce a volume 
which occupies a place of considerable importance in our 
plan, they will have deserved well of the historic synthesis. 


HENRI BERR. 


FROM TRIBE TO EMPIRE 


PART I 
SOCIAL ORGANIZATION AND THE 


PROGRESSIVE CONCENTRATION OF POWER IN 
PRIMITIVE SOCIETIES 


CHAPTER I 
THE PROBLEM—SOCIOLOGY AND HISTORY 


Wuy does this book, which is a history book and takes 
Egypt and the Ancient East for its subject, open with an 
introduction which is sociological and the scope of which 
extends far beyond Egypt and seems to embrace primitive 
institutions in general ? 

Is it in the expectation of comprising within a few pre- 
liminary pages the whole evolution of primitive societies and 
of beginning by establishing the first rung of that ladder 
which leads us to the classical civilization of the ancient and 
the modern world? Is it, therefore, in the expectation of 
providing History with that absolute beginning which History 
itself fails to offer us? Such an expectation would be vain; 
that must not be looked for here. 

Without meaning to reach such an absolute beginning or 
to determine the aspect of human society at the dawn of the 
first day of its history properly so called, it would no doubt 
be bold but yet not absurd, by collecting the most certain 
results of ethnography, to try and sketch the principal 
features of so-called primitive societies—that is, savage 
societies representing a condition less developed than any 
of the historic societies at the most remote epoch. A sketch 
of that sort would not, like a chapter or a volume of history, 
offer the reader the description of a definite society at a 
definite moment, but rather the composite image, so to 

1 


2 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


speak, of an universe of societies resembling one another in 
the rudimentary character of their organization. It would 
thus have the indisputable interest of being a synthetic view 
of a real type of humanity; in virtue of this it could claim 
its own allotted place in a history of human evolution. And 
it would possess the further advantage of providing the 
history of the more civilized societies with a term of com- 
parison allowing them to assess at their true value their 
efforts and their achievements and also perchance, at times, 
their shortcomings. “ 

But however deep might be the interest of such an 
attempt, our contribution, as becomes the limited space 
assigned to it, has more modest aims. It merely proposes 
to introduce the reader to an appreciation of the problems 
which the earliest history of Egypt and the Orient inevitably 
raises, being yet committed not to solve them. These 
problems are not only enigmas of Oriental history, but they 
are problems of origin raised by the history of all the ancient 
classic peoples from whom our civilization is sprung. Those 
which are to claim our attention refer to the formation of 
political organization which is the woof of every civilized 
society, to the way in which in the bosom of this society 
sovereignty has been concentrated till its complete incarna- 
tion in that absolute personal sovereign, of whom the 
Pharaoh of Egypt is an example so striking and so hard to 
explain ; in the domestic sphere the ancient pater familias of 
the prehistoric Roman gens is another parallel instance. 
Now, as if to defy our imperious need to explain everything, 
these problems always present themselves in history as in- 
soluble. The first fixed points of chronology never, in fact, 
coincide with the first gropings of progress, and only reveal 
to us institutions that have a long history behind them. 
Therein lies the whole interest of finding a byway to reach 
the solution of these problems indirectly, since we cannot 
solve them directly. 

It is precisely such a byway that sociology comes to 
offer in the hope of assisting us to a comprehension of history. 
It does not mean, as we began by saying, to make history out 
of prehistory. It will then seek to explain, not to prolong 
the known backward. And on these terms its whole aim is 
to contribute a hypothesis better tested than the rest. Now, 


SOCIOLOGY AND HISTORY 3 


the test of its hypothesis is to be verified in actual society. 
Sociology, therefore, will take the historian to certain selected 
societies—ours will be those of the Australian aborigines and 
the American Indians—and there offer him living experiences 
of the growth of political structure and of sovereignties in 
the course of becoming individualized. For sociology such 
experiences are, in relation to those of history, complemen- 
tary experiences rich in explanatory theories which have, at 
least, the merit of being something more than mere con- 
jectures of the imagination, since they correspond to existing 
facts. It remains, then, for the historian to see whether he 
can assign to the forms only presented to him as already 
fixed the same genesis as he has been led to follow in the 
cases of analogous forms caught in the process of fixation. 


Do you call bold this ‘‘ complementary experience,”’ this 
partnership of sociology and history? We reply that ex- 
planation is only possible by means of hypotheses and that 
it is something to have hypotheses which are already proved. 
Do you call it indiscreet? We say that the collaboration 
attempted in this book is only the fulfilment of a wish long 
ago expressed by its chief author. 

Indeed, it is to studies by M. Moret, now fifteen years 
old, that we can turn for the outline of this complementary 
experience which we are going to attempt on the margin of 
history in order to illumine history. 

In those studies which he has collected under the title 
of Egyptian Mysteries, does not M. Moret himself show us 
how the problem of Pharaonic kingship, at first insoluble, 
only began to be clarified in the light of totemic analogies 
borrowed from primitive societies? ‘* Fifteen years ago,’’ 
he wrote,’ ‘‘the Egyptian monarchy presented an enigma 
which we almost despaired of ever solving. Like the Minerva 
of the fable who sprang fully armed from the brain of 
Jupiter, it appeared before our gaze at the epoch then called 
the most remote (2,800 years before our era) as a fully grown 
organism which seemed to have attained its complete develop- 
ment at one stroke and without effort.’? Then came the 
excavations of Petrie, Amelineau, and de Morgan, allowing 
us to penetrate farther towards the beginnings and to reach 


1 XXXII, p. 143. 


4 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


a native civilization of neolithic date. We could then see 
that, before being united under the rule of a king, Egypt 
included ethnic divisions, each with their gods and chiefs, 
and taking as their rallying emblems representations of 
animals (the falcon, dog, scorpion, etc.) and of plants (the 
rose, sycamore, palm). Hence the hypothesis advanced by 
Moret that these ensigns were totems and these groupings 
totemic clans. On the other hand, when power was con- 
centrated and royalty appeared, the king was regarded as 
the descendant of the totem, as embodying and represent- 
ing it. 

There then was the kingship linked with a whole past age 
which it seemed to recapitulate and embody. It ceased to 
be sprung from the void. And, in fact, our author a little 
farther on comes to this conclusion : ‘‘ This haughty Egyptian 
monarchy planted at the portal of history, which masks 
behind its impressive visage the extent of the past, was not 
built up in a day. It was made. . . in the course of the 
shadowy centuries stretching backward towards the un- 
known, to a time when Egypt was parcelled out among 
clans, divided into hostile tribes, but marching step by step 
from a democratic condition under the egis of the totems to 
a pure autocracy under the egis of the Pharaoh. How many 
centuries preceded that transformation? What was the 
turbulent history of those clans? How was the clan itself 
formed? Did it develop on the same lines as the totemic 
clans in other uncivilized countries? All these problems 
remain to be solved.’”* 

How shall we proceed to solve them? M. Moret was 
already then suggesting an answer in the terms of nascent 
sociological investigations on the one hand and of the 
character of the Pharaoh on the other. ‘‘ What there was 
of totemism in the social state of primitive Egypt,’’ he 
wrote,” ‘is no longer visible to us save as distorted and 
compressed within a single personality—that of the king. 
In archaic Egypt, society was already levelled down, and 
on the ground thus prepared the kings and priests will erect 
by the Pyramid Age the sumptuous edifice of absolute 
monarchy. . . . What he had become in the course of ages 
—son of the gods, himself a god, the sole owner of the soil, 


1 XXXII, pp. 193-194. 2 [bid., p. 167. 


SOCIOLOGY AND HISTORY 5 


dispenser of all favours terrestrial and divine, the sole inter- 
mediary between gods and men as magician and as priest, 
man’s guide on his earthly way and on the path which leads 
to heaven—the Pharaoh appears in history as the most 
formidable moral force ever conceived. All that was implicit 
in the revolution which allowed the king to appropriate to 
his own advantage the totem’s authority over the totemic 
clan and to concentrate in his royal person the divine essence 
of the race.’’ Now, such appropriation which presupposes 
totemism transforms it. The true totemic society, remarks 
M. Moret, knows neither kings nor subjects. It is democratic 
or communistic; all the members of the clan live in it on 
a footing of equality with respect to their totem. If, then, 
hereafter the king is Falcon and he alone is that, if the 
clansmen are his subjects and no longer his comrades, we 
have the proof that the ancient political organization of 
Egypt was at once marked by totemism and liberated from 
pure totemism. In other words, we must find, beside this 
individualization of totemism realizing itself in the Pharaonic 
incarnation, traces of a more ancient collective and un- 
divided totemism from which the individualization in 
question must have sprung by progressive stages. 

And, in fact, we meet both things in M. Moret’s studies. 

First, of course, comes the unification and incarnation of 
power; for that is the very essence of Pharaonic kingship. 
The Pharaoh is the Falcon, he is the totem and the only 
totem. At the same time he unifies the clans and absorbs 
all power in himself. M. Moret summarizes this double 
transformation very clearly:' ‘‘ The reconciliation of the 
clans and the subjection of the natives probably took place 
at the time when Menes built the White Wall to dominate 
the North and constructed the palace for his double at 
Negadah, a site midway between Buto and Hierakonpolis, 
the centre of Thinite Egypt. A curious transformation then 
seems to begin in the personality of the Pharaoh. Till then 
the king, the chief of a particular clan, chose for totem such 
an animal as is deemed to take part in the struggles. After 
the union of the Whites and the Reds the Falcon becomes 
the god who no longer comes down into the arena but 
remains calm upon his royal perch. The Pharaoh no longer 


1 XXXIII, pp. 148-149. 


6 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


treats the bird as a totem, a clan-chief, a comrade in battle. 
He worships it as a national god of unified Egypt, takes its 
name, identifies himself with it, and makes the Falcon the 
symbol of his authority and his first ceremonial title. How 
have the Falcon’s clan and its chief, the Pharaoh, come to 
absorb the other clans and the other chiefs? The result was 
not obtained without struggles and reciprocal concessions. 
The two ancient realms of Hierakonpolis and Buto secured 
for their totems, the Vulture and the Ureus, the honour of 
being chosen after the Falcon as the official titles of the 
king; the Rose of the south and the Bee of the north had 
the same privilege. The Pharaoh then bought his triumph 
by adopting, side by side with the Falcon, four of the 
ancient rival totems, which assured him in return their 
material and moral might. Some centuries more rolled by, 
and the theologians of Heliopolis undertook the task of 
unifying such disparate ideas by constructing the theory of 
divine dynasties founded by the sun Ra, confirmed by Horus 
the Falcon, and continued by their son the Pharaoh, ‘ the 
son of the Sun, who reneweth upon earth the years of the 
life of Horus.’’’ Here, then, was just the transition from 
federalism to centralization and, consequently, the limit of 
the process of individualizing sovereignty. 

This transition, furthermore, presupposes a prior process 
of individualizing power within the bosom of each federated 
clan to which we shall have to return. 

Let us note, further, that the same transformation at 
the same time overtakes the mythological conceptions and 
the organization of political power. We shall see farther 
on that in primitive societies the development of the idea 
of chief goes hand in hand with that of the idea of “‘ high 
god.’’ It is significant to observe that in the case of Egypt 
M. Moret has drawn attention to this nexus between the 
unification of the divine and that of sovereignty. He 
writes :' *‘ Side by side with the animal fetishes of the old 
tribes later promoted to the rank of national deities, 
appeared from the earliest days of unified Egypt a god 
whose cult was common to all the cities. Osiris, at first 
a multiform fetish—now tree, now bull—frees himself from 
his totemic origins; very early he clothes himself in purely 


1 XXXIV, p. 78. 


SOCIOLOGY AND HISTORY 7 


human form. Wherever shone the calm beauty of that 
countenance, the oval contour whereof was prolonged by 
the false beard and the tall white mitre, wherever rose the 
mournful outline of that body draped in the shroud, the 
hands, clasped upon the breast, grasping the whip of the ox- 
herd and the shepherd’s crozier, the Egyptians of all 
provinces recognized the ‘ chief of mortals,’ the ‘ Regent of 
Eternity.’ ”’ 

This unification and this personification, as we have 
said, evidently presuppose something behind them. M. Moret 
recognizes this: ‘* Before being unified under the domination 
of one king, Egypt had been divided. And of these ethnic 
divisions we know, at least, the emblems round which they 
rallied.’** These symbols are the ensigns, the totemic nature 
of which M. Moret affirmed, as we have seen, and the most 
important of them was the Falcon. But M. Moret admits, 
indeed, that the very existence of the Egyptian clans dis- 
tinguished by these ensigns is beyond question,” and that 
the totem was the providence of the Egyptian clan.* Still 
he is struck by one fact: it is that from the moment when 
anything besides simple vases with little or no decoration 
is found in the graves, as soon as monuments bearing in- 
scriptions or descriptive figures make their appearance, 
society is revealed as monarchical, and the monarchy shows 
itself to be already centralized. The Falcon at this very 
remote period is not so much the chief of a clan as the 
protector of the royal family, and, if it be a totem, it seems 
much more that of the king than of the group. In Egypt 
there is no longer any other Falcon than the king and his 
god. That is certain. But if it be admitted that the Falcon 
is a totem and that the Pharaoh holds a monopoly of it, it 
remains none the less true that to understand the monopoly 
we must, by induction in default of direct observation, refer 
to the object monopolized. 

Now, after communicating to us his difficulty, M. Moret 
himself puts us on the track of the explanation and that 
always from the purely Egyptian standpoint. He does not 
forget the principle which he began by laying down in 
reference to the Pharaonic monarchy: nothing is produced 
from nothing. And he observes that, despite the royal 


1 XXXII, p. 145. 2 /bid., p. 152. 8 [bid, 


8 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


hegemony and the monopoly we have seen implied thereby, 
a fragment, as he puts it, of the totemic ideal has persisted 
throughout the 4,000 years over which the Pharaonic dynasties 
lasted. It is the belief that an element existed common to 
the Egyptians, the king, and the gods. We must transcribe 
word for word the terms in which he defines this common 
element, this assumed source of differentiated sovereign 
power, since, as we shall see, they are exactly applicable to 
that idea of mana from which we shall show every sort of 
sovereignty among primitive peoples springs. Here, then, 
is how our author qualifies the Egyptian idea :* “‘ It is a sort 
of genius of the race and the whole of nature. It animates 
at once the matter in inanimate bodies, the flesh of animate 
beings, and the faculties of the spirit. In respect of the 
whole universe and all beings animate or inanimate, this 
genius which they called the ka (a word which, like genius 
itself, means generative force and protecting spirit) played 
the réle of common substance and collective soul. ... We 
believe, then, that, after the social and religious revolution 
that marked the transition from the totemic stage to central- 
ized monarchy, something of the primitive mentality had 
persisted in Egyptian society in this idea of the ka. The 
ka had prolonged primitive metaphysics, since it seems to 
be at once the very substance of an individual, his living 
and imperishable name, and his totem.”’ 

The ka—such, then, was the initial force, the force im- 
manent in all things and all beings, a monopoly of which 
the king ended by acquiring at the same time and for the 
same reasons as he had acquired a monopoly of the totem. 
But just this immanent force, before becoming the appanage 
of the kingship alone, was in primitive times and according 
to primitive metaphysics diffused among all beings, the very 
essence whereof it constituted. M. Moret shows us the use 
of the ka as a very usual name in the archaic period not 
only for the king but also for private persons, as is evident 
from certain stele at Negadah and Abydos dedicated to such 
and such individuals. If, then, in the historic period the 
ka and totem-falecon were embodied in the sole person of 
the king to form his divine Horus name, it is probable that 
in the primitive period the ka, like the totem, belonged to 


1 XXXII, pp. 168-169. 


SOCIOLOGY AND HISTORY 9 


everyone, and not to individuals only but also to things. 
‘‘ The preponderance of the royal ka over the other ka would 
be explained,’’ M. Moret concludes,* ‘‘ by the progress of the 
monarchy. The notion of the personal ka peculiar to every 
man none the less survived in Egyptian society as the 
attenuated echo of a very ancient conception, that of a force 
common to all beings and all things which provided them 
with existence and nourishment.’’ And the ka thus appear- 
ing as originally the ‘‘ diffuse soul of the primitive clan,”’ 
our author asks how it is related to the totem. His task 
consisted, he declares, in assembling the Egyptian materials 
and framing the question. He left it to the sociologists. 


The reader will see that sociology, in taking up the 
challenge, does not aim at trespassing upon the rights of 
History in the least. It remains for us to show what light 
it can bring to the aid of History who invokes it. Now, it 
appears that the Pharaoh, at once Falcon incarnate and 
privileged and exclusive custodian of the ka, is extraordinarily 
like a person, the chief or king, whom sociology meets in 
primitive societies. But more—sociology sees his figure 
taking shape and individual power gradually growing by slow 
degrees out of a state of equalitarian communism and un- 
divided homogeneity that at first presents neither centraliza- 
tion nor personal sovereignty, properly speaking. From a 
social standpoint a power may be at first diffused throughout 
the whole group and then by a gradual concentration become 
organized and individualized. Of this process sociology, 
surveying the domain of primitive institutions, can offer an 
actual experience to history that may be instructive, for the 
latter finds Pharaonic kingship already formed and merely 
surrounded with a swarm of survivals that presuppose behind 
it a whole past, long and obscure, of preparation. With this 
idea of mana and its totemic symbolization, primitive 
societies present the exact replica of the primary notion of 
the Egyptians’ ka. And as the period of pre-individualiza- 
tion, which in the case of the ka and Pharaonic power 
escapes our view, is known in the case of mana and the 
totemic organization of society, you perceive what a con- 
tribution sociology may make. 


1 XXXII, p. 217. 


10 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


We make no pretence of giving here more than a general 
idea of that contribution as a whole. We are going then to 
show in broad outline, first, how certain primitive societies— 
Australian societies—are organized when power is not yet 
truly concentrated or individualized, and then in what way 
these pass from the totemic régime of diffused power to a 
centralized régime involving a personal sovereignty in the 
hands of kings or chiefs who absorb in it all the political 
and religious sovereignty originally diffused through the 
group from which it emanates just as Pharaonic kingship 
did. We shall then be identifying cases where the totemic 
clan, equalitarian and undivided, actually is, just as M. Moret 
inferred it ought to be in the case of Pharaonic kingship, the 
cradle of sovereign power organized and individualized. We 
shall rediscover the road which leads from clans to empires. 


’ 


CHAPTER II 
TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 


I 
THE CLANS 


Wuart, then, in the first place, are those clans which reveal 
to us the most rudimentary forms of political organization 
that we meet when we travel backward along the road that 
leads to centralization of power in early societies? 

Contrary to what might have been expected, they are 
not local divisions—not, that is, primitive forms of territorial 
organization. The village community or, in a still less 
artificial manner, spatial proximity does not in fact seem 
to be a primary mode of grouping among men. That is in- 
telligible when we recall that agricultural and sedentary 
civilizations are not the first that are known, and so it is 
quite natural that before their appearance the relation 
between man and a definite area of territory should not be 
the factor in social organization that it was subsequently to 
become. A multitude of signs conduce to the belief that, 
before geography, religion was called upon to decide the 
manner in which men should be grouped. ‘The original 
constitutional right is mystic in nature. It further may be 
shared in all the ways which are characteristic of mystic 
thought itself. That is why it appears vain to try and dis- 
tinguish, according to modern categories of thought, between 
political groupings and family groupings—vain, for instance, 
to make the family the primary cell of society and to con- 
struct genuine political divisions after the image of the 
family, the city becoming an enlarged family, and so on. 

No doubt the cohesion that unites the members of the 
first social groupings does not differ from kinship. That is 
due to the circumstance that this bond, like kinship, may be 
analysed into a sort of mystic communion which is not the 
physical community of blood on which kinship is normally 
founded. 

The first grouping which we meet in the lower societies, 

11 


12 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


the clan, is in fact a grouping, the function of which is at 
once—without there being any priority to seek—political 
and domestic, but the nature of which is mystical. Its 
cohesion arises from the fact that its members regard them- 
selves as bearers of one common totem and consequently 
one common name, made of one common mystic substance— 
that of their totem. All share therein and none monopolizes 
it, all are sprung from one common source, to which later 
mythology will give individual appearances, imagining that 
in a fabulous past the totem has been revealed to an 
illustrious ancestor of the clan who became, for that reason, 
the eponymous ancestor. In his memoir on the prohibition 
of incest, Durkheim defines the clan thus:’ *‘ A group of 
individuals who regard themselves as mutually related but 
who recognize this kinship exclusively by the very peculiar 
mark that they are all bearers of one common totem. The 
totem itself is a being, animate or inanimate, most com- 
monly an animal or a plant, from which the group is held 
to be descended and which serves at once as emblem and 
collective name. If the totem be a wolf, all the members of 
the clan believe that they have a wolf for ancestor and 
consequently they have something of the wolf within them. 
That is why they apply to themselves this denomination : 
they are Wolves.”’ 

The same definition is given by the author in his 
Elementary Forms of Religious Life,? with the emphasis this 
time on the denomination: what makes the clan is the 
identity of the name. This name, it will be said, is now 
that of the totem, now that of the ancestor. That is true, 
but it in no wise limits the essentially totemic nature of the 
clan. The ancestor’s name is still a totemic name, but one 
to which, as we have indicated above, a more developed 
mythology gives the form of an ancestral name in so far as 
it is to an ancestor, more or less individualized, that it 
attributes the merit of having procured the totem for the 
clan in question. For the clan the totemic origin and 
ancestral origin seem to amount to the same thing: the 
ancestor is never represented solely as he who has begotten 
his descendants and bound them together by community 
of blood. He is not the genealogical root—the family tree 


1 IV, vol. I, pp. 2-8. * Op, 102 i: 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 13 


can never in practice be traced. The ancestor is he to whom 
is due the common benefit of the totem in all cases where 
participation in the totem actually needs a sort of personal 
intermediary. 

The clan thus defined is, remarks Durkheim, a domestic 
society, since it is composed of people who regard themselves 
as sprung from a common origin. But it is distinguished 
from other kinds of family by the fact that the kinship in 
it is based simply and solely on community of totem and 
not on definite relations of consanguinity. Those who belong 
to it are kindred, not because they are mutually brothers, 
fathers, or cousins, but because they all bear the name of 
such and such an animal or plant, because therefore they 
have the same mystic nature. There is nothing territorial, 
it is clear, in this type of solidarity. The clan, primarily 
at least, has nothing about it smacking of the village or the 
tribe. Certain influences which we shall meet will, no doubt, 
make it change into a local clan. But this transformation 
can only be accomplished in so far as the clan lose its proper 
nature, which is totemic, consequently in so far as totemism 
disappear or be transformed. That is what will happen, for 
instance, in certain cases in Australia and very commonly 
among the Indians of North America. 

On the other hand, to pass from the clan to the family 
no such change of nature is needed. The primitive family 
is not, as is supposed, a restricted group of which the origin 
is marriage and the characteristic real consanguinity. It is 
a more extensive domestic group which, we say, is not 
founded on marriage but on participation in a totem like the 
clan. The primitive family is thus only a form of the clan 
specialized and differentiated hierarchically. This identity 
is revealed in the obligations attached by custom to the fact 
of belonging to a clan, which are nothing but the obligations 
of kinship, just as the relations between members of the 
same clan are relations of kinship in the mystical sense we 
have given to that word. These obligations include the duty 
of avenging injuries done to a member of the clan, the duty 
of joining in its worship, the most important duty of marry- 
ing outside the clan (exogamy and, from the point of view 
of the family properly so called, prohibition of incest), and 
the duty of abstaining from eating the animal serving as 


14 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


totem. In Durkheim’s study of Totemism' will be found 
the reasons which led him to maintain the existence of these 
duties against Frazer and Spencer and Gillen, and to deny 
the existence in Australia of primitively endogamous clans. 
We shall return to the point further on. 

These obligations and others, nearly all of which have a 
domestic character, are yet attached to the clan and to it 
alone, and not to the family in the sense which we give to 
that word. The reason is that before the family properly 
so called—a narrower, specialized, hierarchical group, in 
which the feudal type of sovereignty obtains, a type con- 
sequently more artificial than the diffuse sovereignty of 
the clan—reaches maturity, the clan is the true family, 
that is to say, that legal society of kinsmen mutually united 
by community of name and worship and reciprocity of rights 
and duties. These rights and duties are those of kinship, 
but such as are not yet attached to the little actual group 
which the married couple and their children can constitute.” 
** Undoubtedly the Australian clan includes already in its 
bosom more restricted families formed of a man, the woman 
or women with whom he lives, and their young children. 
But these are private groups which individuals make and 
unmake at their pleasure, which are not obliged to conform 
to any definite type. Society does not interfere in their 
organization. They stand in the same relation to the clan 
as the circles of friends or the natural families which we may 
found to-day do to the legitimate family.’’* 

The time is not yet ripe for a truly centralized political 
grouping nor for a _ patriarchal family with paternal 
authority. Such an authority implies a differentiation of 
the notion of sovereignty which is not yet achieved either 
in the domestic or in the political domain. The active and 
passive subjects of obligations are collective in the régime of 
the totemic clan. Power, like responsibility, still has therein 
an undivided character. We are in the presence of a com- 
munal and equalitarian society in the bosom of which par- 
ticipation in the same totem, which constitutes the essence 

a IV, V. 

> Cf. IV, I, pp. 328-831; Durkheim, XII, 149 ff.; and G. Davy, XI, pp. 


84-35. 
2 IV, I, 10. 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 15 


of each and the cohesion of all, places all members of the 
clan on the same footing. 

Let there be no mistake, however; this primitive absence 
of centralization and individualization does not imply an 
absence of regulation. If man is at bottom a social animal, 
he is also an animal with an instinct for rule; and this rule 
has at first all the severity of the religious taboo, which it 
really is, and all the complexity of imperfect organisms which 
do not yet possess either the ease or the simplicity of definite 
instincts. 

But to get an idea of this regulation and, at the same 
time, of the nature and social function of the totemic clans, 
the latter must be distinguished from other social groupings 
with which they are intimately connected—the phratries and 
the matrimonial classes. | 


II 
THe PHRATRIES. TOTEMISM AND EXOGAMY 


The phratry on the terminology proposed by Durkheim is 
at once the initial totemic grouping from which the various 
clans are sprung, and the total grouping which embraces the 
plurality of such secondary clans. It is then, according to 
the same author, of totemic nature like the clan. ‘‘It is a 
primary clan which, in its development, has been led to sub- 
divide itself into a certain number of secondary clans, but 
without which these latter would loose the feeling of their 
common origin and of their solidarity. Consequently there 
subsist between them bonds which make the aggregate 
formed by their union a group endowed with a certain unity : 
that is the phratry as we observe it to-day. What specially 
shows that it began by being a clan, and a clan of this 
nature, is that it often has a totem of its own and that 
sometimes the totems of the different secondary clans 
embraced within it, are obviously derived from that which it 
bears. Hence the second is anterior to the first.’* In 
Australia it is a regular phenomenon that the tribes are 
divided into two moieties or phratries of this type, each 


11V, V, p. 91. See also I, pp. 6-8; III, p. 334, with the reservation that 
phratry should be read where the author by a terminological slip has written 
class; cf. finally XIV, pp. 151-152. 


16 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


forming a distinct moral personality and distinguished also 
locally by its camping-ground.* 

If the phratry is a totemic grouping like the clan, it 
follows that the law of exogamy applies in the same fashion 
to the phratry and to the clan, since this law is totemic in 
origin and itself one of the essential characteristics of 
totemism. Such is the thesis of Durkheim, while Frazer, on 
the contrary, contends that exogamy is quite independent of 
totemism. Frazer denies that it applies to the primitive 
clans, especially to those of the Arunta, in which he sees 
the most primitive organization of all, almost the absolute 
beginning of social organization.” 

For Durkheim, the primitive social organization is 
religious as well as social, and it is the religious character 
of the totem which confers upon it its efficacy as a factor 
in social regulation. The sexual prohibition pronounced by 
exogamy obliging men to marry outside their phratry or 
their clan is simply and solely a totemic inhibition. The 
monograph on the prohibition of incest, published in the 
first volume of the Année Sociologique, aims at providing a 
demonstration of this proposition. He starts from the idea 
of a totemic clan, as we have defined it, and finds in it the 
origin of the sexual prohibition which is to become exogamy : 
a man of the clan Wolf, for instance, cannot join himself to 
a woman of the same clan or to a woman of a different clan 
if the latter clan bear the same totem. And this prohibition 
is so stringent that the penalty which sanctions it is most 
usually death. Now we find ourselves in the presence not 
simply of two clans, but of a plurality of clans sprung from 
the subdivision described above and forming these two 
distinct groups which are phratries. And here sexual rela- 
tions are prohibited not only within each clan, but also 
between the clans of the same group in such a way that a 
man of any clan in the first group can only take a wife from 
one of the clans in the second. That is how the law of 
exogamy extends its sway from the clan to the phratry just 
as naturally as the phratry itself is sprung from the develop- 
ment of the clan. The members of the various clans of a 


1 Cf. Spencer and Gillen, XLIV, pp. 31-32, 56-112; XLV, pp. 14, 70 f. 
* For Frazer’s theory, see his Totemtsm and Exogamy, vols. I, pp. 162 ff., 
272 ff., and IV, p. 265. 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 17 


single phratry consider themselves brothers, while they treat 
as cousins those of clans of the opposing phratry. These very 
expressions remind us that the clan is a family within the 
limits defined above and that its solidarity is kinship. Hence 
the prohibition of incest and exogamy are primarily the 
same thing. 

Thus, clan, family, and phratry have one common totemic 
foundation, and are subject to the law of exogamy in the 
same way and for the same reasons. 

What are those reasons? Durkheim begins by remarking, 
in opposition to McLennan, Lubbock, and Spencer, that if 
marriage be exogamous with respect to the totemic groups 
(clan and phratry), it is generally endogamous with respect 
to the political society (tribe). ‘* This unfortunate confusion 
between the clan and the tribe, due to an inadequate defini- 
tion of both terms, has,’’ he writes,’ ‘‘ largely contributed 
to the obscurity which shrouds the question of exogamy.’’ 
If we can escape from this confusion, we see that exogamy 
in no sense implies the obligation of marrying a woman of 
foreign nationality and that it is not in the direction of 
politics that we must seek its explanation by attributing to 
some cause or other—the Malthusian practice of infanticide 
applied to girls, for example—the need for capturing brides 
from foreign lands. If exogamy characterize specifically 
totemic societies as opposed to political and _ territorial 
societies, it is in the nature of totemism that its explanation 
must be sought. 

Now, totemism is a religious system which implies a whole 
universe of ritual prohibitions or taboos of which exogamy is 
one manifestation. We know that the members of the clan 
are in a relation of mystic consubstantiality with the totem. 
Its essence is also theirs. But if this essence be incarnated 
in individuals, it resides more particularly in certain privi- 
leged parts of the organism and, above all, in the blood. 
Blood is then sacred as the vehicle of the totem, but by the 
same token woman’s blood is even more sacred than man’s; 
in fact, it is the woman in the system of uterine kinship— 
and that is the most widespread among Australian societies— 
who transmits the totem to her children. On the other hand, 
the physiological constitution of woman brings it about that 


st Vieni, Dp. ol, 


bo 


18 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


by periodically losing blood she allows the sacred principle 
which she contains to escape and exposes it to the dangers 
of contact. It can be understood, then, that contact with 
woman should be absolutely prohibited. But since it is due 
to the sacred character of the totem, the prohibition applies 
only to individuals who belong to the totem and are con- 
sequently allied in the same cult and subject to the same 
taboos. For others the prohibition does not exist. And that 
is how marriage comes to be lawful only between clans of 
different totem. 

Such is Durkheim’s explanation of exogamy. ‘* We can 
explain,” writes Durkheim,’ ‘‘ why it comes about that the 
sexual inhibitions apply exclusively to members of one and 
the same clan. The totem, in fact, is only sacred to the 
faithful. They alone are bound to respect it who believe 
themselves descended from it and bear its emblems. But 
a strange totem has nothing divine about it. A man who 
belongs to the Hare clan must abstain from eating hare’s 
flesh and keep away from everything that suggests even the 
external shape of that animal. But he is free from any 
obligation in respect to animals worshipped by neighbouring 
clans. He does not recognize their divinity solely because 
he does not see ancestors in them. He has nothing to fear 
from them, just as he has nothing to expect from them. He 
stands outside their sphere of action. If, then, exogamy is 
bound up with beliefs that lie at the base of totemism, as we 
have tried to prove, it is natural that it too should be 
enshrined inside the clan.”’ 


Totemic and exogamous and exogamous because totemic, 
such then appears in the memoir which we have just 
analysed, the most elementary social unit we know, the clan. 
Some facts, however, soon come to contradict apparently the 
results just reached. Spencer and Gillen, studying Central 
Australia, discovered there a people—the Arunta—a people 
quite exceptionally primitive, according to these authors, 
because better protected than any other by a central situa- 
tion and a desert climate from the influences of whites, and 
yet a people totemic but not exogamous. Must not every 
explanation of exogamy be revised? Must not the primitive 


* IV, I, pp. 53-54. 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 19 


clan be conceived upon quite different lines to those just laid 
down, if it be true that in the most elementary organizations 
the clan is endogamous? A fresh start is indeed necessary 
according to the observers of the Arunta tribe themselves 
and to Frazer. And it is not only the explanation of 
exogamy, but also the idea of the clan, the very conception 
of totemism proposed by Durkheim, that they denounce as 
mistaken. But is it strictly true that the primitive Arunta 
clans have been endogamous and that it is thus necessary 
to review afresh the whole question of totemism? That is 
what Durkheim asks in a second monograph consecrated to 
totemism.* In it he seeks to defend his position against the 
critics we have just mentioned. 

Now, he remarks, if exogamy do not appear to-day as 
the law of the clans among the Arunta, it appears as that 
of those groups of clans which we have termed phratries. 
And of these we have said that, before being the groupings 
of subdivided clans, they had been their first roots. If, then, 
the phratry be indeed a totemic clan and be even the primi- 
tive clan such as existed before the plurality of clans result- 
ing from subdivision, and if the phratry be exogamous, it 
cannot be said that exogamy is contrary to the nature of 
the primitive clan. 

All that can be said is that the principle has ceased to 
rule after the subdivision of this primary clan, which was 
the phratry. But that would be to admit too much. If, 
indeed, none of the totemic clans is to-day confined exclu- 
sively within one of the two phratries, there are strong 
reasons for believing that it was not always so. There is 
still a special affinity between each clan and one or other 
particular phratry—an affinity which recalls the days of the 
totemic monopoly of the phratry. We find, for instance, 
significant traits such as these: the chief who presides at the 
intichiuma, the great totemic ceremony, must belong not 
only to the totem concerned, but also to the phratry to which 
the whole of this totemic group is attached. Similarly, the 
sacred objects, or churingas, may be transmitted from one 
totem to another on condition that they do not pass outside 
the phratry. Finally, the traditions of the Arunta—Spencer 
and Gillen recognize this—show us that originally each 


BF a 


20 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


phratry was divided into a certain number of definitely 
totemic clans without the clans of one phratry being repre- 
sented in the other. Now, we know that marriage between 
members of the same phratry was forbidden. It therefore 
follows that when all the clans bearing the same totem were 
comprised within one single phratry, those clans were them- 
selves exogamous. 

If after that the Arunta tradition report that there was 
originally endogamy inside each clan, Durkheim replies that 
that is a myth invented to explain the current usage. Does 
not tradition make many other mistakes? For example, it 
relates, in flat contradiction to all that we know of primitive 
societies, that the plurality of clans is older than the division 
into two phratries. To sum up, exogamy among the clans 
must have existed formerly for the same reason as among the 
phratries, although that alone has survived. 

The Arunta are not so purely primitive as has been stated. 
They have evolved, and it is in the course of that evolution 
that exogamy among the clans has disappeared to make 
way for endogamy and to survive only between phratry and 
phratry. How has that happened? It must have been, 
answers Durkheim, because the exogamy of the phratry 
ceased to impose itself upon the clans depending on it, 
because some clans escaped from dependence on it to pass 
into the other phratry. 

Now this is precisely what has happened when patrilinear 
relationship is substituted for uterine. In fact, on the 
change in the system of reckoning descent, the children are 
incorporated in the phratry of their fathers instead of that 
of their mothers. But they do not change their totem 
because they change their phratry. They therefore import 
their totems into the new phratry which they enter and 
overlay the pre-existing ones with these. In this way the 
two phratries find themselves interchanging totems. There- 
after, since all the totems were represented in each phratry, 
the exogamy of the phratry was no longer sufficient by itself 
to guarantee the exogamy of the totemic groups. In other 
words, the obligation of marrying outside the moiety or 
phratry to which one belongs no longer implied the obliga- 
tion of marrying outside one’s totem. The clans no longer 
received the law of exogamy from the phratry. On the 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 21 


other hand, as they themselves were weakened by being 
dispersed, as they lost their cohesion and moral unity and 
were no more capable of maintaining and enforcing this law 
of exogamy by their sole authority, they let themselves be 
converted to endogamy while exogamy persisted in respect 
of the phratries only. That is how observers may view the 
endogamous clans without, however, being entitled to draw 
with Frazer the erroneous conclusion that they had been 
endogamous from the beginning and that totemism does not 
imply or explain exogamy. 

Can it be said that in exogamy there is nothing else than 
this totemic taboo which we have just seen, pace Frazer, 
existed in the most primitive clan-organization known? 
Durkheim, who certainly thought so at the time when he 
wrote his monograph on the prohibition of incest, was later 
inclined to seek behind the totemic blood taboo a more 
objective and profound cause. This cause he ascribed to the 
separation of the sexes. We have ourselves endeavoured to 
show that it rested not only on the blood taboo, which 
remains verified in the case of Australian societies and others 
too, but also on a principle which seems to us very wide- 
spread in the primitive world, that of collaboration between 
the phratries. This collaboration takes the form of an 
obligatory interchange of customary dues in a sphere at once 
ritual, economic and legal’ Now marriage, like initiation 
ceremonies and funerals, is one of the occasions upon which 
this interchange is obligatory. And such interchange, then, 
takes not only the subsidiary form of an exchange of 
presents, but also the much more fundamental form of an 
exchange of husbands or wives between the opposing clans. 
We can discern here exogamy, which thus appears as a 
special case and undoubtedly one of the privileges of this 
obligatory collaboration of the phratries through the inter- 
change of customary dues.* 

Everything, therefore, leads us back to our first con- 
clusion: the clans and phratries, these communistic group- 
ings that lie at the basis of primitive social organization, 
are truly defined by these two features—totemism and 
exogamy—and these are complementary since the first 
explains the second. But, beside clans and phratries, the 


1 See on this point our oz jurée, chap. II, part II. 


22 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


structure of primitive society includes other compartments 
to be defined now; for without them the application of the 
law of exogamy would not be intelligible and consequently 
the nature of the exogamous clan and its social function 
would not be intelligible. These are the classes. 


1 III 
Tuer CLASSES AND THE REGULATION OF MARRIAGE 


The classes, which Durkheim proposes to call matrimonial 
classes, are subdivisions of the phratry varying in number 
from tribe to tribe, sometimes two, sometimes four, to each 
phratry. The method by which they are recruited is regu- 
lated by the following principles: (1) in each phratry each 
generation belongs to a different class to the generation 
immediately preceding it; (2) the members of one class 
cannot in principle contract a marriage save in one special 
class of the other phratry.* 

Let us fill in the details. In each of the two phratries 
every clan is divided into two classes designated by a 
special name which is the same for all the clans of the 
same phratry. And in the clan each class corresponds to 
a different generation. Thus under the uterine system the 
child belongs to its mother’s clan, but is placed in a class 
of which she is not a member. What is the nature of these 
classes P 

Fison and Howitt have desired to assimilate them to the 
clan. But that is a mistake, since they have never possessed 
a totem. Others make the class a caste. But that is pure 
hypothesis. Finally, Ciinow,’ whose thesis has been adopted 
by Schurz,” sees in it a grouping of individuals of the same 
age. Durkheim has forcibly criticized this conception.* He 
concedes to Ctinow that it is certain that the position 
occupied in the clan by each member, his rights, and his 
duties do very largely depend upon age. But Ciinow draws 
other conclusions from this. He admits the existence of 
a special nomenclature, including one term for uninitiated 
children, another for initiated and married or marriageable 
adults, and a third for married people who have married 


1 XIV, p. 153. 2 IX, pp. 144-165. 
* ALi. “TV, I, p.014,-and Vi. pp. S08, 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 23 


children. It is to these distinctions that the classes corre- 
spond; and the matrimonial prohibitions attaching thereto 
arise, on Ciinow’s view, simply from an instinctive repug- 
nance to marriages between individuals too disparate in age. 

But if the classes really correspond to age, must not 
individuals change their class as they grow older? Ciinow 
answers: No—since thus the object of the class would not 
be attained. A man not yet quite promoted from the class 
of adults might marry a young girl just arrived in the class 
of marriageable initiates; for, despite their great difference 
in age, their position in the class would make marriage 
between them permissible. ‘‘ It would be,’ says Durkheim, 
‘to prevent such a result that the Australians, according 
to Ciinow, had established the convention that everyone’s 
class should be fixed by a name for his whole life. In this 
manner the different age groups could, in fact, never unite, 
and be confused under a single heading since they bear 
different labels. Only Ciinow fails to see that in this way 
he undermines the very foundations of his theory, since then 
the classes no longer correspond to a division by age strata.’”? 

Shall we say that the aim of the classes is not to distribute 
individuals according to age, but to prevent marriage between 
descendants and ancestors? But if the classes effectively 
prevent a father from marrying his daughter, since she does 
not belong to the class from which he may take a wife, they 
do not prevent the union of a grandfather and oranddaughter. 
They must, then, have some other aim than to exclude 
marriage within the direct line of descent. 

What is certain is that they are connected with the 
regulation of marriage and that this regulation is even their 
sole reason for existing. They must not, then, be confounded 
with the politico-domestic groupings represented by the 
clan any more than with the groupings based upon age. 
That is the objection to adopting the terminology of Spencer 
and Gillen and of Howitt, who call ‘‘ classes’? what Durk- 
heim calls phratries, and ‘‘ sub-classes ’? what he calls matri- 
monial classes. ‘In fact,’? writes Durkheim, ‘‘ that gives 
the impression that the ‘ sub-class’ is of the same nature as 
the ‘class.2 Now that is not the case. The ‘ class ’—what 
we normally call the phratry—is a definite society having 


11V, I, p. 1b. 


24 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


amoral unity. There is often a phratry cult, as Spencer and 
Gillen tell us. It is probable that, at least in origin, all the 
totemic groups comprised within it recognized a common 
totem. In many cases it occupies a specific territorial 
habitat. The ‘ sub-class,’ on the contrary, does not in any 
sense constitute a moral personality. It has no rites peculiar 
to it, no totems specially attached to it. We believe, then, 
that it is desirable to designate by clearly different expres- 
sions groups so obviously distinct ; and, in conformity with 
our usual terminology, we shall continue to call a phratry 
what Mr. Howitt calls a ‘ class,’ and a class or, more specific- 
ally, a matrimonial class, what he calls a ‘sub-class.? We 
say matrimonial class because this group only manifests its 
existence in the way in which it affects the regulation of 
marriage. As to the word phratry, it has the advantage of 
calling attention to the family character of the relations 
uniting the members of each of these two fundamental 
divisions in the tribe.’”? 

Ciinow’s theory thus refuted and these distinctions 
established, it remains to see in what manner the division 
into classes affects the regulation of marriage and comes to 
define the application of the law of exogamy. By virtue 
of the law of exogamy the women of clan B marry men of 
clan A. On the principle of uterine descent the children of 
such women belong to clan B. But in virtue of the further 
principle that the woman as soon as married lives with her 
husband—that is, on the territory of clan A—it is in A that 
the woman has her children and in A that her sons live all 
their lives and her daughters until their marriage. The 
result is a general post between the clans; in the second 
generation, all the children who bear the totem of B and are 
perpetuating clan B are in clan A, and vice versa. At the 
third generation, a fresh interchange brings everyone back 
to the territory the totem of which he bears. 

Such is the outline of what happens in Australian 
societies under the system of uterine kinship: ‘* Thus,” 
concludes Durkheim,” ‘‘ each generation finds itself placed 
in different conditions to that which immediately follows it. 
If the first has been brought up on the territory of the clan 
whose name it bears, the next lives outside it—that is, in 


1 IV, IX, pp. 357 f. 21V,)1,'p. 18. 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 25 


the other clan—but the third finds itself at home again. 
Since, then, the several generations of one clan pass their 
lives in social environments so different, it is natural that 
the custom of calling them by different names should have 
grown up. That is why one special name was assigned to. 
those who were born and remained upon their native soil 
and another to those who, while continuing to bear the 
characteristic emblems of the clan and remaining faithful 
to the same totemic cult, still did not reside in the place 
where the heart of that cult beat. ... In other words, 
each generation will form a class sui generis which will be 
distinguished by name from that which follows it. But the 
one which rises up in the third place will have the same 
name as the first, the fourth the same name as the second, 
and so on. Thus arises the periodic alternation between the 
classes.”’ 

And now the causes which explain the division of each 
clan into alternate classes help to explain the matrimonial 
prohibitions attaching to the classes. The classes of A 
who find themselves living in B and not having B’s totem 
seem to be able to marry in B, yet cannot do so in virtue 
of an extension of totemic exogamy, and because they are in 
too intimate moral connection with B; for, without sharing 
in its totem, they share in its existence and its territory. 
‘*In a general way, a class of one clan can only contract a 
marriage with one single class in the other—namely, with 
that which is correspondingly situated—that of A which is 
born in A with that of B which is born in B, that of A which 
is born in B with that of B which is born in A. And as 
two successive generations can never be similarly situated 
in this respect, it follows that a woman can never take a 
husband nor a man a wife from the generation or class which 
succeeds hers or his.’’* 

The exogamy between classes is therefore only the 
exogamy between clans which has been propagated, and this 
propagation is caused by the amorphous and inconsistent 
nature of the clan. ‘* No one can tell,’’ continues Durk- 
heim,” *‘ at what exact point in space it begins nor precisely 
where it ends. All who have the same totem are parts of 
it wherever they be. Possessing no territorial basis, it could 


1 Vv, I, p. 20. 2 Ibid. 


26 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


not resist the causes which tend to split it up into distinct 
territorial groups. Now the usage requiring the woman to 
go and live with her husband in conjunction with the prin- 
ciple of uterine descent make this dispersal necessary. Every 
clan under the pressure of these two causes combined allows 
part of the generations rightfully belonging to it to settle 
outside it and receives to its bosom generations that are 
strangers to it.”? Thus new combinations are brought forth 
to which the law of exogamy extends and which constitute 
classes. 

If the fact of descent through the mother play the rdéle 
we have indicated in the formation of the classes, the latter 
must vanish when descent is reckoned through the father. 
In that case, children are born and bred in the clan the 
name of which they bear. The successive generations occupy 
mutually the same positions and there is no longer any 
occasion to draw a distinction between them. ‘* The duality 
of totemic group and territorial group has disappeared,”’ 
says Durkheim,’ ‘* whether the two have now become one 
or the first have ceased to exist. Now, it was this duality 
which produced the alternate combinations to which the 
system of classes corresponds.’’ That the classes disappear 
at the same time as the duality and with the advent of 
patrilinear succession 1s, our author, in fact, thinks, the 
inference to be drawn from the facts. Frazer, it is true, 
contests these facts at the same time as he disputes the 
evidence” invoked by Howitt. 

In his monograph on totemism*® Durkheim considers the 
ease of a tribe with four clans (two in each phratry). He 
explains how the law of exogamy applies to it. The tribe 
of the Arunta provides an example; it has two phratries 
and four classes. The first phratry embraces the two classes 
Bulthara and Panunga, the second the Kumara and Purula. 
Now, to express the law of exogamy ruling in this tribe it 
is not enough to say that men of the first phratry can only 
marry in the second; we must add that either of the two 
classes in the first phratry can only intermarry with one of 
the two classes in the second phratry. Thus, the class of 
Panunga in the first phratry has connubium only with the 


* EV ak. 7 TV, 1, .p.2), and «Vip. 102. 
5 IV, V, pp. 82-121. 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 27 


Purula in the second, and the class Bulthara only with the 
class Kumara. Having assumed this, the author shows that 
for the system of reckoning relationship to change, it is 
necessary and sufficient that each phratry exchange one of 
its classes for the corresponding class of the other, the two 
other classes remaining in their original places. The arrange- 
ment of classes enjoying connubium 


Poratry I. Puratry II. 
which, under the system { Bulthara Kumara 
of patrilinear descent, is | Panunga Purula 


must, under the uterine { Kumara Bulthara 
system, have been Panunga Purula 


And it can in fact be proved that such a transformation 
has taken place among the Arunta. Consequently, their 
example shows clearly that the classes are produced, as we 
have explained, by the system of reckoning descent and that 
they are formed with a view to marital regulation. As to 
the eight class tribes, such as those described in Spencer and 
Gillen’s second book, they only offer a new type of classes ; 
the duplication there observed is produced, according to 
Durkheim,! by the substitution of masculine for uterine 
descent. The matrimonial prohibitions proper to the system 
of reckoning kinship which has disappeared survive it and 
are added to the system which replaces it. The cumulative 
result is that marriage is impossible unless fresh classes be 
created. Hence the eight classes. The principle remains 
the same. The whole difference is that the first system is 
produced by the system of uterine descent, and the second 
by the substitution of descent in the male line therefor. 
These eight classes do not in the least weaken the previous 
conclusion as to the nature of the classes and their matri- 
monial function. 


IV 
Tur System oF RECKONING DESCENT 
We have frequently had occasion already to speak of the 
manner of reckoning descent, and what we have just said 


about the classes shows what great importance it does 
possess. No one, then, can get a true idea of the manner in 


11V, VIII, pp. 118-147. 


28 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


which the clan is organized, of the persons whom it groups 
in fact and in right, and of the species of authority it 
exercises without having before him an accurate picture of 
what this system of reckoning descent is. 

Descent in respect of the totem may be reckoned in three 
distinct ways. It may be uterine: the child takes from his 
mother the totem which is transmitted to him automatically 
by heredity. It may be patrilinear: the child in that case 
takes his totem from his father. It may, finally, be local: 
the child then has for totem that by the influence of which 
his mother is believed to have conceived him ; and conception 
is supposed to take place when the woman passes in the 
neighbourhood of a tree, a rock, or some other place where 
an ancestor’s soul is hiding and watching for a chance to 
reincarnate itself. The latter variety of descent is very 
common among the Arunta, whom Frazer regards not only 
as the least advanced of the Australian aborigines, but 
almost as a radically primitive people. The reader knows 
that for him primitive totemism, which he calls conceptional 
for this reason, would be nothing but a theory of conception 
and relationship. Consequently, the mode of reckoning 
descent in question should likewise be the most primitive, 
and it is under the influence of external forces that it gives 
rise sometimes to patrilinear, sometimes to uterine kinship, 
but neither can lay claim to any priority in the genesis of 
the modes of reckoning descent. 

As we have already indicated above in referring to the 
theory of allegedly primitive endogamy, Durkheim, on the 
contrary, holds that the state in which Spencer and Gillen 
have studied the Arunta is far from being their primitive 
state, and the system of kinship and the totemism corre- 
sponding to it are a fortiori not primitive. Already,’’ he 
writes,’ “‘ after the bare facts placed at our disposal by the 
first work of Spencer and Gillen, we had been able to infer 
that there must have been a moment in the history of the 
Arunta people when their totems, instead of being attached 
to localities, were transmitted by heredity from mother to 
children.* This inference is definitely substantiated by the 
new facts discovered by Strehlow,’? which, indeed, just 


7 LY er BOL. * Ct. IV, V, pp. 82-121. 
8 Die Aranda, II, pp. 57-8. 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 29 


eonfirm the earlier observations of Schulze. In fact, both 
these authors tell us that even now each Arunta, besides his 
local totem, has another which is independent of any 
geographical condition, but belongs to him by right of birth 
—that is, the totem of his mother. This second totem, like 
the first, is regarded by the natives as a friendly and pro- 
tecting power which provides for their nourishment, warns 
them of possible dangers, etc. They have the right of 
participating in its cult. When they are buried, the corpse 
is so arranged as to face the direction where the totemic 
centre of the mother lies. That is therefore also, in some 
sense, the totemic centre of the deceased. And, in fact, the 
name of tmara altjira is given to it—a word which means 
‘camp of the totem which is associated with me.’ It is 
therefore certain that among the Arunta hereditary totemism 
in the uterine line is not posterior to local totemism but, 
on the contrary, must have preceded it. For the maternal 
totem to-day fulfils only a subordinate and supplementary 
function. It is a second totem; and that explains how it 
could escape the notice of such attentive and expert observers 
as Spencer and Gillen. But for it to be able to hold its 
place thus in the second rank, being used as a double of the 
local totem, there must have been a time when it occupied 
the first place in the religious life. It is partly an expro- 
priated totem, but still one that recalls an epoch when the 
totemic organization of the Arunta was very different from 
what it is to-day. Frazer’s whole construction is thus under- 
mined at the base.”’ 

It therefore really seems that the facts about the Arunta 
are not contrary to the priority of uterine descent. Further, 
this negative objection surmounted, a certain number of 
proofs can be adduced in support of such priority. 

1. The more rudimentary societies are, the more common 
is the matriarchal clan—i.e., that in which the children 
take the legal and religious condition of the mother. Durk- 
heim, in his monograph on the prohibition of incest, estimates 
that it is to be met four times out of five in Australia, and in 
America is twice as common as the patriarchal. 

2. Transformations of uterine into patriarchal clans have 
many times been observed, while not a single case of the 
inverse transformation is known, those alleged by Boas 


30 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


among the Kwakiutl being, in fact, pure conjectures which 
we think we have refuted by solid arguments in our Foi 
qurée. 

3. Further, no reason can be found which might induce 
the father’s group to surrender its children to the advantage 
of the mother’s group. On the contrary, Durkheim has 
admirably shown the good reasons for which children might 
have been led to take the totem of the father in preference 
to that of the mother. In Australia the child is born and 
grows up amid its paternal relatives. We are, indeed, 
already acquainted with the custom which in the uterine 
system required the husband to take his wife to his home— 
that is, to the territory of his own clan. In such circum- 
stances the child, although theoretically attached to his 
mother’s totem, cannot fail sooner or later to fall completely 
under paternal influence. At the same time, the anomaly 
which leads him to bear a different name to the group with 
which he lives becomes glaring. Let the traditions of uterine 
totemism itself be weakened and this anomaly will quickly 
disappear to the advantage of the paternal name. Now, the 
facts do show that—among the Kurnai and Narrinyeri, for 
instance—the totemic tradition is shaken or even obscured 
where agnatic relationship is established. 

4. When the clan is agnatic, sexual relations are forbidden 
not only with members of your paternal clan, but also with 
those of your uterine clan. That is, the old uterine inhibi- 
tions survive the change of system and are added to those 
implied by the new patrilinear régime. 

5. A significant change is observed—for instance, among 
the Arunta—which reveals the women as despoiled of certain 
rights and privileges which they formerly possessed. Now, 
such decadence implies a past greatness, no doubt that of 
the time when the women perpetuated the cult and the 
family : ‘‘ Without meaning to maintain,’”’ says Durkheim,} 
** that the system of uterine kinship is always and necessarily 
accompanied by a sort of matriarchy and gynecocracy, it 
is nevertheless certain that wherever it is in force the woman 
enjoys, if not a supremacy, at least a relatively high social 
position. ... 

‘In particular, as each religious society is thus propa- 


1 IV, V, p. 99. 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 31 


gated by them, women under that system quite naturally 
hold a more prominent position in religious life... . Now, 
among the contemporary Arunta, women are excluded from 
the ceremonies and kept almost completely outside the fold 
of the worship. But formerly they played a much more 
important part in this tribe. Traditions often depict them 
even as initiators. There are some rites they are supposed 
to have instituted, some totemic groups they have founded. 
A number of sacred objects are said to be derived from 
women of whom the myths preserve memories. Spencer and 
Gillen themselves note the contrast between the present and 
the past. ‘Many traditions,’ they say, ° can undoubtedly be 
regarded as evidence that in the past women have possessed 
greater privileges than at present.’ ”’ 

6. Father and mother in the lowest societies each use 
different expressions to designate their children, sons or 
daughters alike. That must go back to a time when the 
relations of a child to his mother were quite different to 
those with his father. 

7, The husband remains, in some respects, in dependence 
on his wife’s parents all his life long. He owes part of the 
products of his hunting to his father-in-law and to the 
children of his wife’s brothers, to his mother-in-law and 
to his mother-in-law’s father, and so on. Conversely, a 
taboo forbids his eating an animal slain by one of those 
persons. There is, therefore, a veritable tribute paid to 
the wife’s group. And that always implies an organization 
of uterine succession. Another indirect proof is derived 
from facts which are, so to speak, the opposite of these. 
On the authority of Rivers, as well as of Haddon, the Melane- 
sians make a brother designate the children of his brother 
and the children of his sister by the same name. They 
similarly identify the mother, the mother’s sister, and the 
brother’s sister. And all this arises just because the system 
of patrilinear kinship has been substituted for uterine kin- 
ship, and a child’s relations to his father’s sister, for instance, 
become identical with those which he bore on the uterine 
system to his mother’s sister. 

8. Beside the obligations which weigh upon the husband 
in respect of his wife’s relatives, the rights and privileges 
conferred on the latter, and specially on the wife’s brother, 


32 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


the uterine uncle, are particularly worthy of attention. This 
is the analysis we' have given of his position: ‘* In Melane- 
sian societies, as in a host of others, he is the keystone of 
the family vault, the centre of which is the mother, and of 
which he himself is the chief so long as the father’s part 
remains in abeyance, and consequently until the final advent 
of definite patrilinear kinship. A special word, wadwam, 
denotes him, and it is further applied collectively to all the 
mother’s brothers. He enjoys the following prerogatives : 
He has the power to stop a combat; he is possessed of 
eminent right of ownership over all that is possessed by the 
clan to which he is united by this bond of kinship; he even 
has the right to take from them certain objects which are 
yet their property without their being entitled to resist him; 
finally, he takes the first place in guarding the young initiate, 
and it is he to whom are sent the marriage gifts which the 
husband’s brother presents to the wife’s family. Frazer? 
points out that if the uterine uncle sees his nephew’s blood 
flow as the result of a fall, a cut, or a bite, he pronounces 
the words na kul, which give him rights over his nephew’s 
property. In the same way, if the nephew is bitten while 
fishing, the uncle takes his net; if he is wounded, the uncle 
may pay him a domiciliary visit and plunder his hut.”? 

9. Finally and above all, the organization of the classes 
in Australian tribes presupposes the priority of uterine kin- 
ship. As we have shown in detail above on analysing the 
nature and function of the matrimonial classes, the system 
of four classes is necessitated by the existence of uterine 
kinship, and that of eight classes by the substitution of the 
patrilinear for the uterine system. The latter point, fore- 
shadowed by Durkheim in his monograph on totemism,? 
has been taken up again and developed at length by him in 
the special study which he has devoted to the Australian 
matrimonial classes.* 

10. Till now we have been speaking of Australia and 
Melanesia. Among North American nations we find the 
system of uterine kinship so firmly established and current 
among such well-organized tribes that it must have been 


2 XI, p. 87. 2 XVI, II, p. 66. 
> IV, V, pp. 106-7, ‘ IV, VIII, pp. 118-147. 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 33 


re-enforced by causes peculiar to these peoples. That is 
what happens, for instance, among the more northerly 
nations—the Tlinkit and the Haida. Boas and Swanton 
themselves are agreed in attributing uterine kinship to them. 
Not only does the uterine uncle occupy there his usual 
privileged position as head of the family, but certain tradi- 
tions even describe the tribal chief by the very characteristic 
expression town-mother. It is also, on the testimony of 
Swanton and Krause, the regular custom among these 
peoples that in case of war or disputes, husband and wife 
betray one another to their respective families. When one 
proceeds from north to south, and leaving the Haida reaches 
the Kwakiutl a complete change is perceptible, according 
to Boas. Then we meet people with a primitive patrilinear 
and local organization who are actually taking over uterine 
totemism from their northern neighbours, the Haida and 
Tlinkit. As we have already indicated above, this unique 
case of passage from patrilinear to uterine totemism is im- 
probable. And we refer the reader, not being able to re- 
produce it here, to the lengthy refutation we have given’ to 
the theory of Boas. 

Let us limit ourselves to summarizing the conclusions 
we believe justified on the two points which particularly 
concern us here—the transmission of forenames from grand- 
father to grandson, and the transmission of names and crests 
from father-in-law to son-in-law. In both cases among the 
Kwakiutl we have to do with uterine inheritance disguised. 
In the first case, a privileged person, the paternal grandsire, 
who stands as representative of the two lines, is used to 
pass by a trick from one manner of reckoning kinship to the 
other. In the second case, uterine inheritance, no longer 
capable of being transmitted directly by the female line, is 
transmitted indirectly to the children to be born by medium 
of a masculine holder, the son-in-law, who appears as destined 
to give heirs to the uterine line and to hand on to it names 
and privileges which he assumes provisionally. 

This, then, is how the transmission of forenames first 
introduces a patrilinear element into the matrilinear system. 
Let us imagine two lines—one maternal, the line Crow, and 


1 XI, pp. 271-289. 


34 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


the other paternal, the line Wolf—corresponding to the 
division into phratries still effective among the Haida and 
already extinct among the Kwakiutl, but yet implied behind 
the dust of their clans. To express these relationships let 
us consider the case in one generation of the son of a Crow 
mother and a Wolf father (exogamy, of course, requires that 
the father and mother belong to separate totems). Imagine 
a stage at which, as is for practical purposes the case with 
the Haida, relationship is still only reckoned in the uterine 
line. At this stage, nevertheless, the forenames will be 
handed on from grandfather to grandson. Here is the ex- 
planation we have suggested’ for this fact: ‘‘ Our son Crow 
will say: ‘I am a Crow by my mother and maternal 
ascendants (my mother’s mother, the mother of my mother’s 
mother). Relationship not being reckoned on the paternal 
side, I am nothing by my father, who is a Wolf. I am not 
a Wolf, but only a Crow. But if Iam nothing by my father, 
I am yet something by my father’s father, by my paternal 
grandfather; by him Iam a Crow. I can hold from him, for 
example, by way of forename such and such variety of Crow 
name. How is that possible if by definition no one yet 
reckons by males? Quite simply, because my paternal 
grandfather is at the same time—exogamy demands it—my 
uterine great-uncle (my maternal grandmother’s brother).’ 
It then merely remains to ask what causes him to retain— 
from the point of view of relationship—his quality of paternal 
grandfather in preference to that of uterine great-uncle. 
That can evidently only be due to the tendency towards 
reckoning by the paternal line of kinship. 

‘** Now, to achieve this result without at first violating the 
rule of uterine succession, the father cannot be invoked, for 
he is perforce of the other line to his son—a Wolf when his 
son is a Crow. In the generation before, however, is to be 
found this privileged person, the paternal grandfather, who, 
qua uterine great-uncle, is, in fact, a Crow like my mother. 
Advantage is therefore taken of this double character. He 
is regarded as the transmitter of relationship without violat- 
ing the matrilinear rule since the relationship he is going to 
transmit to me will be precisely that of my mother, whose 
uterine uncle he is. Under a purely uterine system of reckon- 


1 XI, pp. 287-8. 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 35 


ing descent, there would be no reason to mention the title of 
paternal grandfather to express a relationship. So we are 
actually in a period of transition.”’ 

This conclusion is verified by the second point we have 
mentioned—the transmission effected by Kwakiutl marriage. 
The father-in-law Crow transmits his wife’s name, Wolf, to 
his son-in-law, who is, in fact, at the same time his uterine 
nephew—according to archaic ideas if not among the 
Kwakiutl of to-day—in order that this son-in-law-uterine 
nephew may hand on to his son the name Wolf. The son-in- 
law, indeed, only enjoys the usufruct of the name which is 
to represent to the son the heritage from his maternal grand- 
mother transmitted through the agency of his father and 
his grandfather. As a whole, the transmission is uterine in 
principle. But in practice it is only the men who are capable 
of effecting it. As in the previous case, then, things are 
in course of changing. The difference is that in the previous 
case the transmission of forenames alone betrayed the change 
and caused men to enter the scene. This time it really seems 
that all sorts of transmission require men as agents. Still, 
the man’s role remains quite subordinate. He is only the 
executor, as we have explained. He has no proprietary 
right, only a trusteeship of the names and privileges which 
he is charged with transmitting. But that is a move in 
a specific direction ; soon he will be both executor and heir. 
He will no longer be agent only, but also author of a succes- 
sion which will become wholly patrilinear. 

Meanwhile, to this transitional réle which makes him a 
trustee and executor of the uterine heritage, corresponds— 
another sign of transition—a further manifestation of 
autonomy. He takes his wife to live with him. The indi- 
vidualistic and patriarchal privileges do not yet belong to 
the eldest male in the line as under a true agnatic system, 
but to the rich son-in-law who can pay a heavy cautionary 
deposit for holding on hire and deposit the uterine names 
and crests. 

These are conclusions with a double interest. On the 
one hand, they attest, in fact, the existence of a patrilinear 
system gradually usurping the place of an older uterine 
system, and establish thereby the priority of the uterine 
which we have asserted. On the other hand, in this transi- 


36 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


tion they show an advance towards that masculinization and 
individualization of power which is our goal. We will return 
to this second inference later. For the moment let us keep 
to the first: the case of the Kwakiutl, far from constituting 
an objection, is, on the contrary, evidence in favour of our 
thesis. All their essential institutions—their precontractual 
system and their system of transmitting names, crests, and 
privileges—are explained as transitional institutions between 
the uterine and totemic system and the patriarchal and local 
system. 

In our book quoted above, we have attempted to work 
out traces of an analogous transition in the ancient law of 
Germany, Greece, and Rome. It is well known that on one 
special point—succession to the throne—Frazer has brought 
out some very curious survivals. 

**It would be neither unnatural nor surprising,”’ he 
writes,! ‘‘if among the ancient Latins female kinship sur- 
vived in the royal family after it had been exchanged for 
male kinship in all others. For royalty, like religion, is 
essentially conservative; it clings to old forms and old 
customs which have been long vanished from ordinary life.’’ 
And, in fact, Frazer points out that that is what happened 
in Ancient Greece and Rome. ‘“‘ It is,’’ he says,’ ‘‘ very 
remarkable that not one of the Roman kings was immediately 
succeeded by his son on the throne. Yet several left sons or 
grandsons behind them. On the other hand, one of them 
was descended from a former king through his mother, not 
through his father, and three of them—namely, Tatius, the 
elder Tarquin, and Servius Tullius—were succeeded by their 
sons-in-law who were all either foreigners or of foreign 
descent. This suggests that the right to kingship was trans- 
mitted in the female line and was actually exercised by 
foreigners who married the royal princesses. ... The 
children of such unions would inherit their mother’s name, 
not their father’s; the daughters would remain at home; the 
sons, when they grew up, would go away into the world, 
marry, and settle in their wives’ country whether as kings 
or commoners.”’ 

In Greece the same sort of custom is traceable. On the 


1 Lectures on the Early History of the Kingshit, p. 249. 
2 Jbid., pp. 231-238. 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 37 


testimony of Pausanias, two of the most ancient kings of 
Athens, Cecrops and Amphictyon, had married the daughters 
of their predecessors, and the sons’ destiny corresponds in 
reality to the law of uterine succession. 

They are perceived emigrating and scattering abroad in 
quest of a crown which they cannot find in their own family. 
Among a host of examples which Frazer cites we will quote 
that of Pelopids. ‘‘ Their ancestor was Tantalos, king of 
Lydia, but his son Pelops passed into Greece, won Hippo- 
dameia, the daughter of the king of Pisa, in the famous 
chariot race, and succeeded his father-in-law on the throne. 
His son Atreus did not remain in Pisa, but emigrated to 
Mycene, of which he became king. In the next generation, 
Menelaos, son of Atreus, went to Sparta, where he married 
Helen, the king’s daughter, and reigned himself over that 
country. Further, it is very notable that according to the 
old lyric poets, Agamemnon himself, the elder brother of 
Menelaos, reigned not at Mycenz, but at Lacedemon, the 
native land of his wife, Clytemnestra.’”* 

Frazer infers from this the existence of an Aryan usage 
allowing royal descent to be transmitted through women 
and not through men, and bestowing the kingship from 
generation to generation on a man of a different family, 
sometimes on a foreigner, who, by marrying one of the prin- 
cesses, would then reign over his wife’s people. ‘* The 
popular tale with many variants,’ says he, ‘* which relates 
how an adventurer arriving in an unknown land wins the 
hand of the king’s daughter and the half of his realm, may 
very well be a reminiscence of a real custom of the past.”’ 


The great difficulty in asserting the existence and re- 
constructing the features of this primitive uterine right 
which is supposed to have ruled the clan at first is that 
nowhere, no matter how rudimentary be the society under 
consideration, can it be isolated immediately and in a state 
of purity. It is chiefly by survivals and various indications 
that we are obliged to infer its existence. Sidney Hartland, 
one of the most renowned exponents of the theory of uterine 
right and matrilinear descent, gives express recognition to 
this. He is reduced to culling from all over the world 


1 Of. cit., p. 240. 


38 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


isolated facts which seem to him to be indications of the 
uterine reckoning without finding that system really function- 
ing anywhere. 

As everyone knows, this author has come forward to 
champion this theory of uterine right or matriarchy in an 
important work, Primitive Paternity, and in a quite recent 
little book, Primitive Society, has returned to the charge in 
order to defend his theory against the unfavourable deduc- 
tions which the facts about the Arunta allow to be drawn. 
This new book, however, brings forward no fresh evidence. 
If the demonstration be regarded as a whole, the value of a 
certain number of the proofs advanced, especially in Chapter 
IV. of the earlier volume, Primitive Paternity, cannot but 
be recognized. The reader is struck by cases where there is 
a complete absence of any kinship between father and sons, 
and consequently the possibility of the latter fighting the 
former, and by cases where there is a corresponding absence 
of kinship between brothers born of the same father. The 
following facts are no less striking: In Malabar a wife con- 
tinues to live with her own family; and when the husband 
is permitted to take her to his abode, it is only on condition 
that, if he die, she shall return at once to her own kindred 
and that even before the corpse has been carried out. On 
the other hand, a wife has no part in the funeral ceremonies 
and receives nothing from her husband’s estate. Again, in 
the same spirit it is reported that among many African 
peoples, when a married woman is murdered, the duty of 
avenging her falls not upon her husband but upon her own 
kindred. Likewise in the case of debts, the family of the 
mother alone and not the father can give a child as surety. 
Similarly, again, the father’s estate is not inherited by the 
children, but returns to the mother’s family. As to the 
uterine uncle, he possesses very generally the rights and 
privileges of which we have spoken above, and of which he 
preserves at least a part for a long time under the patri- 
linear system. 

Nevertheless, these facts do not form the chief basis of 
Sidney Hartland’s theory, which is mainly founded on his 
well-known conception of paternity among primitive peoples. 
In any case, this theory does not appear to us perfectly 
coherent. 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 39 


Durkheim! complains that this hypothesis bases maternity 
unhesitatingly on the physical evidence of the tie of blood, 
while in the case of paternity it very justly admits that 
relationship does not result from consanguinity. In what 
way, asks Durkheim, does maternity become an exception 
to the general rule? It might perhaps be answered that 
Sidney Hartland does not put the question in quite that 
way and that, if he exclude physical paternity, it is not 
because it is a tie of consanguinity, but because it is not 
perceived as a tie at all; primitive man, according to Hart- 
land, is absolutely ignorant of the procreative effect of the 
sexual act. This act, then, if irrelevant to procreation, could 
not establish any sort of bond at all between the man who 
performs it and the children who ultimately result there- 
from. 

But it may be questioned whether the savage’s ignorance 
of the efficacy of sexual intercourse is as certain as Sidney 
Hartland says; if without being a sufficient cause such inter- 
course is not still regarded as a necessary cause, a prepara- 
tory condition, of procreation. And, in any case, it may be 
asked whether such ignorance, presuming it to exist, is a 
sufficient explanation for the uterine family and system of 
kinship. Still, from the standpoint which concerns us, we 
are in no wise obliged to take sides in this controversy. We 
add to the host of other indications of the priority of the 
uterine system of kinship those which we meet in Sidney 
Hartland’s works. And, rather than the explanation he 
offers for this priority, it behoves us to emphasize what he 
rejects—namely, classificatory kinship interpreted in the 
sense of McLennan—that is to say, primitive promiscuity.” 
Therefore it is, in his view, not community of wives and 
the resultant impossibility of determining paternity with a 
view of basing authority and the right of hereditary trans- 
mission thereon that have produced the uterine family and 
uterine kinship. 

The latter are then not incidental to primitive anarchy, 
but correspond to a definite organization and regulation of 
the clan. Uterine kinship gives its peculiar conformation to 
the primitive clan, makes it a uterine clan, and imposes 


21V, XII, pp. 411-2. 
2 See XVIII, p. 12, and also XVII, I, p. 325. 


40 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


upon it the system of matrimonial classes which we have 
described. 

Undoubtedly, some authors refuse to assign it such social 
significance, and they see in the transmission of the totem 
only a superficial fact affecting neither the structure of the 
society nor the essential relations which give it cohesion. 
Such, for instance, is Ciinow’s standpoint. According to 
him, the uterine family is only a relatively late phenomenon, 
the appearance of which synchronizes with the introduction 
of agriculture; there is thus no occasion to base it on the 
transmission of the totem, the sole object of which would 
be to prevent incestuous unions. Durkheim has forcibly 
assailed this view which misapprehends the importance of the 
totem and the totemic grouping.! ‘‘ Far from being merely 
a conventional sign,’’ he writes, “‘ the totem is the symbol 
of the religious life, and there is nothing in such times over 
which religion does not extend its sway. Consequently, the 
transmission of the totem in the female line is of capital 
importance for the constitution of the primitive family. 
Wherever it occurs, it attests the existence of uterine clans. 
And as it is much more common among the lower races, 
everything concurs in demonstrating that the primitive fact 
is that, at the beginning, the clan was recruited exclusively 
through the women. But, if long before the introduction of 
agriculture, the child followed its mother in everything that 
concerns the most fundamental social relations, uterine kin- 
ship is not due exclusively to agricultural civilization.” 

Two conclusions follow: the uterine system is original, 
and it is constitutive of the clan. Abstraction made of the 
divergences in explanation, this important view is common 
to Durkheim and Sidney Hartland. The latter has given 
a synthetic tabulation of this system,” in which he recognizes 
the following characteristics : (1) Descent and, consequently, 
kinship are reckoned exclusively through the mother. (2) 
Uterine society is divided into clans embracing men and 
women who are related through the mother and mutually 
treat one another as brothers and sisters. The descendants 
of sisters, but not of brothers, belong to the clan. (8) Ex- 
ogamy is the law of these clans. (4) The avenging of blood 
is for them a collective obligation, as in every kind of clan. 


IV, II, pp. 316-317. * XVIII, p. 32-37, 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 41 


(5) In the clan authority belongs theoretically to the mother, 
but is rarely exercised by her. (6) It is most commonly 
exercised by men who are not their husbands, but their 
brothers (the children’s uterine uncles) or their own sons, 
Such men have descendants in the opposing clan. They 
are, therefore, never fathers of the children of the clan in 
which they live. (7) After marriage the husband either con- 
tinues to live with his mother and her family, limiting him- 
self to paying visits to his wife (in the other clan), or else 
he goes to live with his wife in her clan and in dependance 
on her relations. In such a case we have what is called 
‘“matrilocal®? marriage. (8) Property and functions are 
handed on from maternal uncle to nephew or niece and 
niece’s children, or again from brothers and sisters to 
brothers and sisters. 

These characters are obviously theoretical and are not 
met pure in any uterine clan, for the simple reason that 
patrilinear organization and local organization must very 
soon react upon uterine organization. But they have the 
advantage of setting up an ideal type of uterine clan and 
allowing us to recognize and appreciate the survivals which 
it leaves in the paternal régime—survivals which, to speak 
the truth, constitute its most concrete manifestation. 

The uterine clan, therefore, appears primarily as a sort 
of limiting case. That is the danger of attempting, when its 
existence has been legitimately inferred, to picture it as 
actually yielding in a primitive reality all the fruits which 
the theory seems to attribute to it. To that danger Bachofen, 
for instance, has fallen a victim, speaking of matriarchy and 
gynecocracy where he should only have spoken cautiously 
of clans constituted by uterine kinship. It is all the more 
difficult to maintain the proper restraint since the criterion 
of facts very often eludes us. Without going so far as to 
talk of matriarchy, it is reasonable to inquire whether the 
exceptional legal position that the uterine régime conferred 
upon woman did originally raise her status and endow her 
with privileges and a measure of authority. 

On that point, Durkheim’s ideas have remained very 
tentative, as is natural in the case of facts so complex and 
so dubious. His conclusion in the monograph on the pro- 
hibition of incest and contemporary articles is categorical 


42 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


and negative. ‘*We have not the least intention,’? writes 
he in the monograph in question,' “ of maintaining with 
Bachofen and Morgan that in principle each little family 
group was centred round the wife and not the husband, that 
it was in the mother’s abode and under the direction of the 
maternal relatives that the child was brought up. Facts 
show positively that in Australia such an arrangement is 
contrary to the ordinary usage. We only meant to speak 
of the group of which the totem is the base. Now, we hold 
it indisputable that originally the totem was transmitted 
exclusively in the uterine line and, consequently, that the 
clan was composed only of descendants through women.” 
Uterine transmission of the totem, that was the minimal 
assertion. The scope of this assertion was reduced as far 
as possible in another contemporary passage,” where the 
‘author specially commends Grosse, the author of an im- 
portant work on the evolution of forms of the family, for 
having well expounded the extreme rarity of matriarchy. 
‘** Wherever the child follows the mother,’ says he, “the 
wife is in a state of subordination and inferiority in respect 
to male relatives in her own family as she is again in respect 
to her husband and his relatives. It is the maternal uncle 
or the brothers on the maternal side who govern the child. 
{t is not the mother. In a word, the respective positions of 
the two sexes do not appear to differ from what they are 
elsewhere. What is peculiar to this type of family is the 
relative position of the husband as compared to the wife. 
It could not, therefore, be explained by the rdéle of the wife 
in economic life.” 

Later the same author seems less categorical and more 
inclined to allow the wife a preponderant moral and legal 
place in the clan under uterine kinship. ‘‘ Without intend- 
ing to maintain,’? he declares,’ “that uterine kinship is 
always and necessarily accompanied by some sort of matri- 
archy and gynecocracy, it is nevertheless certain that, 
where it is the rule, woman enjoys, if not a supremacy, at 
least a relatively high social status.’? And, as cult is then 
perpetuated by women, our author recognizes that they 
naturally occupy a privileged place in religious life. 

To what extent is the situation of woman under the 


IV, I, p. 22. 2 IV, I, p. 325. *1V, V, p. 99. 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 43 


uterine system one of legal and moral privilege? That is 
obviously a question of degree, and the answer will vary 
with the tribes and their conditions of existence and the 
influences to which they are exposed. But, however un- 
favourable to feminine privileges the answer may be, and 
however complete the wife’s subjection to her male uterine 
relations, it remains none the less true that it is uterine 
kinship which gives its distinctive features to the clan; it 
is, in fact, that which determines who are members of the 
clan, just as under the agnatic system it will be kinship 
through males. We have also seen that a very common 
system is the transitional one, in which both reckonings are 
combined. Now, kinship is not only a quite external prin- 
ciple of classification destined to determine by difference of 
name who belongs to such and such a grouping. It is a 
bond of unity with the clan. But we know that what makes 
the clan is the mystic community of the totem. It is, then, 
kinship which in each generation creates new totemic com- 
munions—from the point of view of the family, new relation- 
ships. It perpetuates totemism in the clan across the succes- 
sive generations: it thus perpetuates the clan itself. 

The reader can now see that we were justified in assert- 
ing above that an understanding of the system of kinship 
was indispensable to a comprehension of the totemic clan. 
Even when it is local, as in the case of the ‘* conceptional 
totemism ’’ of the Arunta, which assigns to the child the 
totem of the place which his mother has passed in order to 
conceive him, kinship does not, in fact, connect the child 
with this place, but with the ancestor who was awaiting 
reincarnation at the spot. And as this ancestor is himself 
a totemic personage, it is always the totemic principle the 
continuous existence of which is ensured by the several modes 
of reckoning kinship, whether through the influence of 
proximity to sacred places, or through the female line to 
which it is at first attached, or through the male line in 
which it subsequently makes its home. 


44. SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


V 


EXPLANATION OF TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION: ITS PRINCIPLE 
AT ONCE SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS 


We are now acquainted with the main features of totemic 
organization ; it only remains to explain the nature of the 
principle which underlies it. What in itself is the principle 
of which the totem is the symbol? Is the totem the ancestor 
in the personal and mythological sense of the word and con- 
sequently the god who protects and founds the clan that 
bears and perpetuates his name? 

That is, no doubt, an attractive solution, for it would 
refer the foundation of the city and its religion to ancestor 
worship. But such a solution assumes that the primitive 
totemic clans knew such ancestors and, consequently, that 
individual totemism is the most archaic form of totemism. 
This thesis is dear to the hearts of American anthropologists, 
who derive the clan’s collective and undivided totemism 
from manitous individuals, divine heroes who would have 
revealed the totem to the group which became that of their 
disciples and descendants. But such a manner of regarding 
the subject is open to most serious objection. The totem 
possessed personally by the individual is one thing; the 
group’s totem, no longer an individual, but a collective 
totem which endows the group with cohesion and constitutes 
its very essence, is something else. Genuine totemism is of 
the second kind. The first is a sort of fetishism, or a deriva- 
tive form of the second; for the theory of the priority of 
individual totemism comes to shipwreck on certain facts. 
In the first place, the strict distribution of the totems and 
subtotems among the phratries and clans is incompatible 
with an origin in the choice of individuals and attests a 
collective organization. On the other hand, if individual 
totemism were really primitive totemism, it ought to be met 
principally among the least advanced peoples. Now, on the 
contrary, it is collective totemism that is found among such, 
as the example of Australia shows. There collective totemism 
reigns alone in almost all the tribes, while the privilege of 
the enjoyment of individual totemism is not found among 
any of them. 

The totem is not, therefore, in origin an ancestor; it is 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 45 


a collective and undivided principle, the cohesive force, as 
it were, immanent in the clan, the diffuse soul of the clan. 
Is this impersonal collective principle, immanent in the clan, 
deified in the strict sense of the term? Does it become the 
object of a cult and make totemism a religion, the most 
elementary of all religions ? Durkheim answers in the affirma- 
tive, Frazer and Loisy deny it. 

Durkheim is at pains to demonstrate that the totem is 
not only the name and emblem of the clan’s members, but 
that it also possesses a sacred character and is the type of 
the sacred things. He points to it engraved on the sacred 
instruments, the churingas, a sort of bull-roarers which are 
whirled and made to whistle, the note emitted by which has 
magic properties. The totem is also carved upon the sacred 
posts. And it is the totem which confers their sacred char- 
acter upon these instruments and posts as upon bodies on 
which its likeness is tatooed. Human blood would likewise 
be held sacred in so far as it serves as the totem’s vehicle. 
And, in a general way, beings of the totem’s species and 
the clan’s members, too, would be sanctified by reason of the 
relations with the totem which they enjoy. 

There is nothing in the universe which is not embraced 
within the totemic system, which thus forms a sacred cos- 
mology completing the religion of the totem. ‘** The circle of 
religious objects,’’ writes our author,’ ° extends far beyond 
the limits within which they at first seemed to be confined. 
It includes not only the totemic animals and the human 
members of the clan, but, since nothing exists which is not 
classified in a clan and under a totem, there likewise exists 
nothing which does not receive in varying degrees some 
reflected religious character.’? The same religious character, 
then, compenetrates the first social grouping, the essence of 
which is totemic. ‘‘ The members of a single clan are not 
united by community of habitat nor of blood, since they are 
not necessarily blood-relations and are often scattered over 
various tracts of the tribal territory. Their unity, therefore, 
springs solely from the fact that they possess the same name 
and the same emblem, that they believe themselves to be 
related in the same way to the same categories of objects, 
and that they practise the same rites—in a word, from 


1 XIV, p. 219. 


46 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


the fact that they have communion in the same totemic 
Cnty i 

It remains to ascertain what constitutes the sacred char- 
acter of all the miscellaneous objects to which, as we have 
just seen, this cult extends—that is, of the figured representa- 
tions of the totem, of the animals and vegetables the name 
of which the clan bears, and of the clan’s members. Durk- 
heim replies :° ‘* Since all these objects are sacred for the 
same reason, although in different degrees, their religious 
character cannot be inherent in any of the peculiar attributes 
that distinguish one from the other, nor in their intrinsic 
properties, but in a principle which is common to them all 
indifferently. ... It is to this common principle that 
worship is really addressed. . . .. In other words, totemism 
is not the religion of such and such animals or men or 
images, but of a sort of nameless and impersonal force which 
recurs in each of these beings without, however, fusing with 
any of them. None possesses it completely and all partici- 
pate in it. And it is so far independent of the individual 
subjects in which it incarnates itself that it precedes them 
as it survives them.”’ 

But if it be, in truth, such an impersonal force that the 
Australian represents to himself in the material species of 
the totemic animal, ought he not to form some notion of it 
himself? As far as the Australian is concerned, our author 
does not think so, but the Australian’s more advanced 
brothers, the Melanesian and the American Indian, although 
impregnated with totemism, do, in fact, attain to the idea ~ 
of a common force diffused among all beings united by 
totemic kinship. They call it by various names, of which the 
best known is the Melanesian mana, that savage replica of 
the Egyptian ka, which we have already forecasted. This 
notion, already very widespread, could only disentangle 
itself against a background of federalism. It could then 
only exist potentially in the particularist environment of the 
Australian clans. 

It is well known with what penetrating insight Hubert 
and Mauss have studied this notion of mana, and have 
ascribed to it a nature both religious and magical. ‘The 


+ XIV, pp. 238-9. 2 Ibid., pp. 268-9. 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 47 


word mana,’ they write,’ ‘‘is common to all the strictly 
Melanesian languages and to the majority of the Polynesian 
tongues too. Mana is not merely a force, a being, it is also 
an action, a quality, and a state. In other terms, the word 
is simultaneously a substantive, an adjective, and a verb. 
People say of an object that it is mana, meaning that it 
possesses that quality. In this case, the word is a sort of 
adjective (it cannot be applied to a man). People say of an 
entity, man, spirit, stone, or rite, that it has mana, the 
mana to do this or that. To Mr. Codrington, it [the idea of 
mana] extends to the whole of the magic and religious rites, 
to the whole of the spirits of magic and religion, and to the 
whole of the persons and things taking part in the whole of 
the rites. Mana is properly that which constitutes the value 
of things and people, magic value, religious value, and even 
social value. The social position of individuals is in direct 
proportion to the importance of their mana; this applies 
especially to their position in the secret society. The im- 
portance and inviolability of taboos upon property depends 
upon the mana of the individual who imposes them.”’ 
Further on (p. 111), the same authors explain how we 
can even succeed in widening still further the meaning of the 
word and say that mana is the force par ewcellence, the 
veritable potency in things which re-enforces their mechanical 
action without annihilating it. It is mana which makes the 
net catch, the house stand fast, the canoe be seaworthy. It 
is the fertility in the field and the healing or deadly virtue 
in drugs. In the arrow it is mana that kills. And in this 
case it is represented by the death-bone with which the 
dart is armed. Let us remember that tests by European 
medical men have shown that the poisoned arrows of 
Melanesia are simply enchanted arrows, arrows with mana. 
Yet they are held to be poisoned. It is clear that their 
real deadliness is attributed to their mana and not to their 
points. Mana appears here as a quality added to things 
without prejudice to their other qualities, or, in other words, 
as something superadded to things. The surplus is the in- 
visible, the marvellous, the spiritual, and, in short, the 
spirit wherein resides all power and all life. It cannot be 


1 < Théorie générale de la magie,” LV MILE pe 108. 


48 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


the object of experience, because it really absorbs experience ; 
the rite adds it to things and it is of the same nature as the 
rite. It is at once supernatural and natural, since it is 
diffused through the sensible world, where it is heterogeneous 
and yet immanent. 

The magic, religious, and social nature thus conferred 
upon things by mana is evidently not an intrinsic property 
of the things which could be detected by an analysis made 
of them or by simple experience. We have just said that 
it is superadded to things; that is to indicate that it 
is only attributed to them in the common representation 
of consciousnesses which think them thus transfigured and 
dignified. Hubert and Mauss explain that very clearly in 
the case of all the magic virtues which judgments ascribe 
to the entities—things, individuals, or rites—of magic. 
‘* What imposes a magical judgment,’’ they write,’ “is a 
quasi-convention which lays it down in advance that the 
sign creates the thing, the part, the whole, the word, the 
event, and so on. In fact, the essential point is that the 
same associations are reproduced necessarily in the minds of 
several individuals, or, rather, of a mass of individuals. 
The universal and @ prior character of magical judgments 
seems to us to be the mark of their collective origin.’’ In 
social matters it is Just the same. The efficacious value of 
the totemic bond, for instance, as constitutive of cohesion 
of the clan and of relationship in the family group is created 
by the mystic and collective representation that the com- 
munity of the group itself forms of it. Thus it is not the 
elements which appear to us as the real constitutive moments 
of paternity or kinship—the sexual act or physical con- 
sanguinity, for example—that appear as such to primitives. 

In the light of this we can understand the meaning 
which the idea of mana may have behind the totemic repre- 
sentation symbolizing it. It is the very essence, the might, 
and the sovereignty of the clan. 

Now, it is precisely of this nameless, diffuse, impersonal 
force, the genesis of the notion whereof we have just traced, 
that Durkheim makes the following assertions: (1) It is the 
source and prototype of that which all religions will assume 
as sacred and will then individualize in the guise of divinity. 


1“ Théorie générale de la magie,’? IV, VIII, p. 126. 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 4.9 


(2) It is nothing else than the collective might inherent in 
every group qua corporate group, and it therefore constitutes 
the social being of the primitive clan represented as its 
sacred being under the varieties of the totem. ‘* The totem,”’ 
he says,’ “‘is, on the one hand, the outward and visible 
form of what we have called the totemic principle or god. 
But, on the other hand, it is also the symbol of that specific 
society which is called the clan. . .. If, then, it is at once 
the symbol of the god and of the society, is it not because 
the god and society are one? ... Theclan god, the totemic 
principle, cannot then be anything else but the clan itself, 
but the clan hypostasized.”’ 

Totemism, the tangible image of the impersonal and 
abstract principle of mana, therefore possesses a double 
virtue in Durkheim’s eyes, at once religious and social. We 
could not dissociate the two things save at the cost of dis- 
torting our author’s thought. But they are, nevertheless, 
not necessarily inseparable—at least, not so absolutely as 
Durkheim implies. 

His apotheosis of society, hypostasized as divinity and 
exalted to be the unique source of everything that can be 
regarded as divine, has been keenly contested by a great 
number of authorities and can, in fact, only be offered as 
an explicative hypothesis. 

Above we have cited Frazer and Loisy who, among 
others, reject such a hypothesis. But the same Frazer who 
denies totemism any sort of religious character,” yet assigns 
it an important role as a factor in the primitive social bond :° 
‘Tf totemism,’’ he wrote, ‘‘ has apparently done little to 
foster the growth of higher forms of religion, it has probably 
done much to strengthen the social ties and thereby to serve 
the cause of civilization, which depends for its progress on 
the cordial co-operation of men in society, on their mutual 
trust and good will, and on their readiness to subordinate 
their personal interests to the interests of the community. 
A society thus united in itself is strong and may survive. 

The tendency of totemism to knit men together in 
social groups is noticed again and again by the writers who 
have described the institution from personal observation. 


1 XIV, p. 294. 2 Cf. XVI, IV, pp. 5 and 27. 
3 Jbid., IV, p. 38. : 
4 


50 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


They tell us that persons who have the same totem regard 
each other as kinsmen, and are ready to befriend and stand 
by one another in difficulty and danger. Indeed, the totemic 
tie is sometimes deemed more binding than that of blood. 
A sense of common obligations and common responsibility 
pervades the totemic clan. Each member of it is answerable 
even with his life for the deeds of every other member ; each 
of them resents and is prompt to avenge a wrong done to 
his fellows as a wrong done to himself. In nothing does this 
solidarity of the clan come out more strikingly than in the 
law of the blood feud.”’ 

Totemism is therefore in every way a very active ferment 
engendering social solidarity. Frazer even tells us that in 
the bosom of the clan the totemic bond is more potent than 
the bond of blood. But he does not explain why, and he 
does not tell us how the clan could have been led to form 
its cohesion and its internal relationship by means of a 
kinship of the nature of the totemic. 

Undoubtedly in his first study on totemism—1.e., in the 
article written in 1886 for the Encyclopedia Britannica and 
completed to appear in book form in 1887 and reprinted, 
although partly disavowed by its author, in vol. i of 
Totemism and Exogamy—in his analysis of the social aspect 
of totemism, Frazer insisted that the totemic tie is more 
solid than the tie of blood or of the family in the modern 
sense." He based his conclusions on the examples of the 
tribes of West Australia and of North-West America. In 
these tribes, in fact, as he explained, the local group was 
necessarily composed of members belonging to at least two 
different clans in virtue of exogamy. As a result, it ran the 
risk at every moment of seeing its totemic elements dissolved 
by the advent of a blood feud. Such an event ranged 
husbands and wives in opposing camps, and divided children 
against their fathers or against their mothers according as 
to whether descent was reckoned through women or through 
men. 

But these explanations only succeeded in vindicating, 
without genuinely explaining, the power of the totemic 
bond and the imperative nature of the obligations to which 
it gave rise. The question then remains: why is the totemic 


+ XVI, I, p. 58. 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 51 


tie originally a more potent bond than the tie of blood or of 
vicinity? In other words, how does the totemic bond 
acquire its position of privilege in constituting the first 
solidarity of the clan? The answer seems simple enough. 
The clan has at first no means of ensuring its cohesion or of 
defining itself save by adopting a totemic name and emblem. 
Durkheim rightly points out that it cannot define itself by 
its chief, since power is still quite diffuse and in no sense 
individualized. Nor can it be defined by the locality it 
occupies, because nomadism prevents its being sufficiently 
attached to a specific locality, and also for the reason that 
Frazer has just suggested: because the law of exogamy 
compels husbands and wives of different totems to live 
together in the same family—and on the same territory 
when territorial fixation have advanced that far. As to 
consanguinity in the physiological sense, it cannot suffice for 
the purpose in itself, because the primitive with his mystic 
mentality cannot imagine it as effective. His ideas of re- 
incarnation and of conception stand in the way. Blood is 
to him much more the mystic vehicle of the essence of the 
species or of the genius of his ancestors than the organic 
element nourishing physical life. Durkheim tells us* that 
**the unity of the group is only perceptible thanks to the 
common name which all its members bear.’’ 

But it would evidently involve a misapprehension of all 
the element of magic in primitive thought not to admit that 
this common name is the symbol of a common nature in 
which all bearers of the name share. Therefore, after inquir- 
ing why the totemic denomination and emblems should 
define the primitive clan better than anything else, we 
return to this notion of a common and impersonal nature 
which is the reality symbolized by the totemic name and 
which we have above called mana. 

The virtue superadded by mana to the intrinsic qualities 
of the group and its constituents when the group tries to 
define itself and to assert itself, is not merely, as Frazer 
contends, the surplus of material or even moral power which 
union produces in time of danger. In the case of this mana, 
as with that which animates magic, it is a power, mysterious, 
collective, and immanent not only in the present members of 


1 XIV, p. 333. 


52 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


the clan, but in the whole line of its ancestors. And this 
mysterious, ancestral, and superior power cannot but be 
thought in a religious form by the primitive’s mystical men- 
tality, and can consequently only be regarded as a sacred 
principle. It is, then, impossible with Frazer to deny the 
simultaneously religious and social character of totemism. 

But, on the other hand, let us remark that this religious 
character which we attribute to the principle of cohesion in 
the primitive clan does not take us outside the domain of 
the explanation of primitive social organization, and does 
not prejudge any theory on the origin of religion. We, 
indeed, assert that the primitive categories of social thought 
are not only not emancipated from religion, but still only 
exist through it. But that is not to affirm the converse, 
that primitive religious categories are nothing else than a 
mode of translating the essence and structure of the social 
group. In other and simpler terms, to say that the social 
mana which forms the essence and cohesion of the clan can 
only be represented under the guise of a sacred principle, a 
religious force, is not to say conversely that every sacred 
principle is a social principle. To treat these two proposi- 
tions as identical means, in the end, the apotheosis, the 
deification of society; it is to assume that the clan and only 
the clan is god. It is for this postulate that Durkheim has 
been so bitterly criticized. Obviously, then, it is desirable 
to dissociate, as we have just done, such a postulate from 
the religious and totemic explanation of social origins. Is 
not this explanation in itself speculative enough to deter us 
from duplicating it unnecessarily by a second hypothesis 
which to us seems quite unneeded to support it? This 
latter explanation certainly attributes a religious, as well 
as a social, character to the totem; it is not thereby obliged 
to postulate a monopoly of this religious character by the 
totem and can leave open the question whether other trans- 
cendent forces, such as the powers of nature, may not 
possess the same character in the eyes of the primitive and 
appear to him as equally sacred. 

We now know the main features of totemic organization, 
and we have isolated the principle on which it is based. We 
are therefore in a position to understand that character, at 
once communal and regulated, which we assigned to it in 


TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 58 


describing the structure of the clan. We had said that any 
centralized power was absent therefrom and that, despite 
its homogeneous and amorphous character, it nevertheless 
represented neither anarchy nor promiscuity. We saw, 
indeed, that membership of the clan implied obligations 
and that, far from promiscuity being the rule, marriage 
was not only regulated by the law of exogamy, but regulated 
in the most strict and extraordinarily complex manner— 
that is, through the system of classes. We saw that these 
obligations and regulations, as well as the customary dues 
interchanged between the phratries, were collective. We 
now understand how they can be obligatory while remain- 
ing collective and anonymous. It is because they were im- 
posed by a far more imperious command than that of any 
individualized chief, through this diffuse impersonal force, 
mana, the principle of cohesion in the clan, immanent in all 
its members and regarded by them with a religious awe. 

In attempting to retrace the genesis of political power, 
we therefore speak of sovereignty before speaking of chiefs 
properly so called. The sovereignty we speak of is as 
national and democratic as possible in the sense that it is 
diffused through the whole group without being really con- 
centrated at any one point. 

Why this immanent, anonymous, collective character ? 
Because the individual, in whose hands alone concentration 
could be effected, does not yet live a life separated and 
distinct from that of the group. Not that his original 
absorption in the group is, as Herbert Spencer alleged, the 
result of artificial constraint necessitated by the state of 
war and exercised by a military despotism. This primitive 
effacement of the individual, and the resultant absence of 
concentration of power, correspond to the type of society 
which the totemic organization, just analysed, offers us. 
As Durkheim has noted, this primitive effacement of indi- 
viduality only renders its progressive development in the 
bosom of society more intelligible; for, if the individual 
arise out of the group by incarnating it instead of first 
asserting himself in opposition to it in order to dominate 
it, his authority is quite naturally accepted, appearing as 
a delegation of the authority of the group. This is a point 
to which we shall return in studying the transformation of 


54 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


communal totemic organization in the direction of concen- 
tration and individualization. But this study must begin 
with that of another organization than the totemic—the 
territorial organization which is to react on the former and 
facilitate its evolution in the direction of concentration and 


individualization. 


CHAPTER III 


TERRITORIAL ORGANIZATION IN RELATION TO 
TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION 


Tur totemic is not the only organization encountered among 
primitive societies. Besides the totemic framework, there is 
another which interferes with it, and, moreover, soon rivals 
it; this is the territorial grouping. As soon as we are no 
longer dealing with pure nomadism, such groupings always 
co-exist more or less with the totemic groupings. And they 
quickly tend to absorb and destroy the latter; for the soil is 
a great tempter and a stern master to men, and community 
of local life is a source of habits which become necessarily 
accepted and deeply rooted until they create instincts of 
sociability and solidarity in co-operation. These will render 
the ties of mystic communion, such as those exemplified in 
totemism, useless to cement together cities. 

On the other hand, besides these influences of community 
of local life, there is another reason explaining the formation 
of territorial divisions within societies—namely, that such 
divisions correspond to a need to which the clan system also 
corresponds, but which survives the latter by producing its 
effects under a new form. This need is the division of the 
first societies into similar compartments—segments, to use 
Durkheim’s expression.! As far and as fast as social organ- 
ization replaces totemic organization, these segments them- 

1 XII, p. 150: ‘‘ We apply the term ‘societies segmented on a clan basis’ 
to peoples constituted by an association of clans. We say of such societies 
that they are segmented to indicate that they are formed by the repetition of 
mutually similar aggregates analogous to the rings of the Anulosa and we 


speak of the elementary aggregate as a clan because this word well expresses 
its mixed nature, at once domestic and political.” Cf. also XII, p. 108 : 
‘© When the horde becomes a social segment instead of being the entire 
society, it changes its name and is called the clan, but it preserves all its 
constituent features. It will perhaps be objected that wherever we observe 
it to-day the clan generally embraces a plurality of individual families. 
But, firstly, we believe that the formation of these small family groups 
is posterior to the clan. And, secondly, they do not constitute social segments 
strictly speaking, because they are not political divisions. Wherever it is 
found the clan is the ultimate division of that nature.” 


55 


56 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


selves cease to be family aggregates to become territorial 
communes.* The passage from one state to the other takes 
place only through a slow evolution. ‘*‘ When the memory 
of a common origin is extinct and the domestic relations, 
which derive from it but often survive it, have themselves 
also disappeared, the clan is no longer conscious of itself save 
as a group of individuals who occupy the same tract of land: 
they become the village proper. It is in this way that all 
peoples who have outgrown the clan phase have formed 
territorial districts, marches, communes. As the Roman 
gens came to be enlisted in the curia, so these were fitted 
into other districts of the same nature but wider, called 
sometimes the hundred, sometimes the parish or union, which 
in their turn are often incorporated in others yet more ex- 
tensive (county, province, or department), the union of 
which forms the society.’ 

In Australian societies, besides totemic groupings and 
matrimonial classes, a third variety of groupings is distin- 
guished. The latter are territorial and based upon com- 
munity of territory, and vaguely subject to the vague 
authority of those embryo chiefs called alatunjas of whom 
we shall speak shortly. This duality of organization has been 
analysed in the case of Australia, especially by Howitt,® and 
interpreted with penetrating insight by Durkheim.* Now, 
what strikes us when we examine the territorial organization, 
which people are prone to picture as something clear and 
sharply defined, is its extreme indeterminateness. ‘* Under 
the influence of our modern ideas,’’ writes Durkheim,’ ‘‘ we 
should be inclined to picture it as constituted at base by a 
fundamental and well-defined geographical district which, 
joined to other districts of the same sort, would form a more 
extensive territorial division until we reached the political 
society as a whole. And that is exactly how the author does 
view it when he defines the tribe as an union of local groups— 
that is, on his terminology—of clans or hordes. Unfor- 
tunately it is very hard, if not impossible, to define the local 
group with any precision. Its dimensions and forms are 
kaleidoscopic. It is sometimes so extensive that it bears all 
the aspect of a tribe, and Mr. Howitt warns us in many cases 


; ee nea ee XII, pp. 157-167. * XII, p. 162. 
IV, IX, pp. 358-360. * 06 2tthe 


TERRITORIAL ORGANIZATION 57 


that he is unable to say what sort of a group he is dealing 
with. Sometimes it is the family which constitutes the terri- 
torial unit. The same indefiniteness infects the higher grades 
of organization. Undoubtedly the group called a tribe is not 
without a certain unity. The tribe is presided over by a 
group of chiefs who meet to deliberate upon common affairs ; 
all the individuals who compose it bear one common name. 
But the material and moral frontiers between neighbouring 
tribes are often barely perceptible. It frequently happens 
that contiguous tribes assist one another in religious cere- 
monies. The structures of their matrimonial organizations 
are identical; the same names serve to denote the phratries 
and the classes (cf. e.g., the case of the Kamilaroi). But the 
conclusive proof of the fluctuating nature of these territorial 
divisions is the ease with which the populations intermingle. 
In principle a child is of right a member of his father’s local 
group, and for this reason can hunt and fish on the territory 
occupied by this group. But he has analogous rights on the 
territory of his mother’s group and also in the country where 
he was born or where he was brought up, even when this 
country is not that of either of his parents, but belongs even 
to a foreign tribe.’’! For this territorial organization to 
acquire a little more fixity the final establishment of the 
patrilinear principle in reckoning descent is needed. 

But at the same time as the territorial organization pro- 
gresses, the older organization, which we have called totemic, 
and which Howitt calls social, goes on growing fainter. The 
Kurnai and the Narrinyeri, for instance, who possess a 
constitution based on territory, only exhibit vestiges of 
totemism. ‘‘ That means,’’? writes Durkheim,’ ‘‘ that the 
two organizations are mutually opposed, since the one re- 
cedes as the other gains ground, and consequently they 
correspond to two successive phases of social evolution. In 
other words, organization must have begun by being totemic 
and has only subsequently become territorial. That, of 
course, is not to say that there could have been a moment 
when the Australian societies were quite without relation to 
the land, when their structure was altogether independent of 
their geographical basis. It is impossible that any social 
group should not be attached in some degree to the territory 


1 IV, IX, p. 359. 2 Zbid., p. 360. 


58 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


it occupies and not bear its mark at all. Only, whatever 
territorial element there was in the social organization was 
then quite secondary, quite latent. What marked the 
bounds of the society was no natural barrier, what deter- 
mined its form was not the configuration of the soil. The 
tribe was essentially an aggregate of clans, not of districts, 
and what constituted its unity was the totem and the ideas 
centring about it. In a word, totemic organization must be 
regarded as congenital to Australian societies.’’ 

Let us recall that Sumner Maine had already pictured 
affairs in this manner, save that he said tie of kinship instead 
of saying totemic tie. In his Notes on the History of Ancient 
Institutions, published in 1874, he examines kinship as the 
foundation of society, and sees therein what he calls the most 
ancient tie binding human societies together. It makes little 
difference that for him this kinship was exclusively patri- 
archal and that he misapprehended the importance of 
uterine relationship. The important point here is that he 
based the first human groups on something other than terri- 
torial contiguity. And he shows how the tribe only becomes 
settled on the soil subsequently and by gradual stages. 
‘*From the moment,’’ he says,’ ‘‘ that a tribe settles per- 
manently upon a given tract of territory, the earth and land 
replace kinship as the foundation of its social organization.”’ 
Territorial sovereignty is then substituted for tribal 
sovereignty. ‘‘ England was formerly inhabited by the 
English; the English are to-day the people who inhabit 
England.’”’ This striking formula might serve as the epitome 
of the history of the human origins as well as of that of 
constitutional law. ‘‘ The history of the Greek and Latin 
cities proves,’’ remarks our author, ‘* that in them, as in a 
great number of countries besides, community of territory 
has been substituted gradually and not without violent 
shocks for community of race as the foundation of national 
unity.’’ And he adds that the one ambition of the ancient 
democracies was, at base, to be accepted as equals by the 
aristocracies, for the sole reason that the old and the new 
aristocracies dwelt together within the limits of the same 
territorial district. In conclusion, and when viewed as a 
whole, this evolution towards a territorial basis has produced 


a ee, 


TERRITORIAL ORGANIZATION 59 


the notions of feudal lordship, monarchy, and sovereignty in 
the case of large groups, and the idea of landed property 
among more restricted groups. 

Yet it is notorious that both in respect of so-called 
primitive societies and of those of preclassical antiquity a 
certain number of authors have upheld the contrary thesis 
to that which has just been expounded, and have asserted 
the original character of organization in territorial districts. 

To begin with the primitives, this is what has been argued 
by several American anthropologists in reference to the 
Indian societies of North America, and especially by Mr. 
Boas in regard to the Kwakiutl societies, so typical of that 
civilization of developed totemism among the Indians of 
North-West America (British Columbia, Vancouver, and 
Queen Charlotte Islands). According to Mr. Boas,' indeed, 
the Kwakiutl, in contradistinction to their neighbours in the 
north, knew neither the uterine system nor totemic organ- 
ization; they possessed from the beginning a territorial 
organization and a patrilinear system of kinship. But we 
have expounded this theory elsewhere and tried to do justice 
to it.2 * Mr. Boas,’’ we wrote, “‘ ascribes to the Kwakiutl a 
primitive organization, territorial and not totemic. 4%." No 
doubt each family group lays claim to an ancestor who pro- 
cured it an emblem, if not a totem. But the vital point, 
and what determines the social organization, is where this 
ancestor, who comes from heaven or from the depths of the 
earth or from the ocean, has appeared and founded his 
family. This territorial principle asserted in the Fifth 
Report® is reaffirmed, perhaps still more positively, in the 
study of secret societies. Firstly,’ the clans’ traditions 
clearly reveal what we must regard as the original cellule of 
Kwakiutl society. Each clan traces its origin to a mythical 
ancestor, who has built his hut in a certain place, and whose 
descendants have lived at this place. In a large number of 
cases these places correspond to the sites of ancient villages 
which have been inhabited for a long time, as the accumula- 
tion of shells discovered there proves. We conclude from 
this that the clan was originally a village community the 
members of which, seeing their numbers diminishing, or 


AGE 2 Cf. G. Davy, XI, pp. 277-8. 
EVIL pe 80: 4 VI, pp. 333-4. 


60 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


feeling the need of protection, abandoned their primitive 
habitat and went to join forces with other analogous com-» 
munities, while preserving a certain degree of independence.”’ 
We have italicized all the territorial expressions to bring out 
the spirit of the theory. It is found again more distinctly 
expressed a few pages further on. It is just what we have 
stated—the substitution of the local tribe and clan for the 
totemic phratry and clan as the original division. 

What is to be thought of this theory? The first remark 
which suggests itself is that Mr. Boas is, and declares himself 
to be, incapable of defining precisely either the mode of 
division or the details of the divisions which his system 
implies. Not only is the agreement between the table of 
organization given in the Fifth Report! and that in the work 
on secret societies” only partial, not only do the divisions 
called gentes in the first become clans in the second, but, 
further, these clans are presented as themselves subdivided 
into narrower groups called subdivisions, but as to the nature 
of which we are given no precise information. Then, to 
complicate matters further, when he comes to speak of the 
subdivisions of the clans, Mr. Boas mentions subdivisions of 
the tribes in the same breath. And it is not plain in what 
relation the latter stand to the former. Cases of segmenta- 
tion into two of one primitive tribe and others of the fusion 
into one of two distinct tribes are reported. The first case is 
exemplified, for instance, by the Guetela and the Qomoyne, 
who are Kwakiutls, and have, it is said, been disrupted as 
the result of a quarrel in which the chief of the former was 
killed. The legend says that they were twins, and one 
sucked the right, the other the left, teat of their mother. 
But is not that merely a legend corresponding to the duality 
of the phratries, and therefore implying a totemic and not a 
territorial origin for the divisions in question ? 

Similarly, Mr. Boas tries to explain apart from totemism 
how the names and crests of the several clans—he does 
recognize the existence of clan crests—have been acquired 
by their owners. For that purpose he very naturally refers 
to the legends. These he divides into two classes: some 
introduce the eponymous ancestor directly in the form of a 
supernatural being; others describe him as meeting the 


1 VI, p. 47. 2 VI, p. 31. 


TERRITORIAL ORGANIZATION 61 


~ supernatural being who grants him his protection and the 
hereditary possession of his masks and crests. But, as Sir 
James Frazer very justly remarks, and as we have ourselves 
tried to show in reference to the Haida, these legends sus- 
piciously resemble those of totemic mythology, and the crests 
are nothing but totems. Besides, has not Mr. Boas himself 
come to agree to this? Here is, in fact, a very significant 
confession which he makes in the Twelfth Report :* ‘* The 
Kwakiutl are divided into a number of clans, the majority 
of which have animals for totems. The origins of the greater 
number of these totems are explained in the same way as 
among the tribes of the North, while the others are regarded 
as descended directly from the totemic animal.’’ There we 
have this people, not only assimilated to their neighbours 
of the North, but even more archaic than they in respect of 
some of their clans, since they sometimes admit direct descent 
from the animal. We ask for nothing more. But, to tell the 
truth, Mr. Boas is far from always granting us as much. 

If, now, turning from ethnography, we direct our gaze to 
the prehistory of the classical peoples, we equally meet the 
assertion that social organization among them was originally 
based on territory, and that the gentile division of society 
only appeared later as a result of the transmission of the 
same lands in the hands of the same families from generation 
to generation. This is the view advanced by Szanto”? in 
the case of Greece, and by Holzapfel* in respect of Rome. 
‘‘ But,”? Durkheim‘ answers, ‘‘ if the nation was divided into 
three tribes (Hyleis, Dumanes, and Pamphyles, in the case 
of the Dorians), only after being settled on the land, and if 
each tribe had begun by being just a territorial division, 
there would have been a time in which the whole country 
occupied by the invaders was parcelled out into three great 
territories, three geographical provinces, independent or not, 
whereas no trace of such a division is detectable. But how 
can it be conceded that a quite artificial division, with no 
roots in the moral consciousness of the people, should have 
been so religiously imitated and reproduced even down to 
the nomenclature adopted by the different Dorian cities as 
soon as they began an independent life? It seems much 


4 VI, pp. 328-332. 2 Die griechischen Phylen. 
3 Die drei dltesten romischen Tribus. VS TY fp.o2e: 


62 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


more natural to suppose that the Dorians were thus divided 
from the beginning—that is to say, while they were still just 
an ethnic group with no territorial basis. For such a hypo- 
thesis it is not, however, necessary to suppose that these 
tribes had been at first three distinct societies. It is enough 
to see in each primitive tribe a natural group of phratries 
linked together by special ties, just as each phratry was a 
natural group of yévn. In this way it is possible to explain 
how much later, when the phratries, after being settled on 
the soil and dispersed in villages, came again to be concen- 
trated to form cities, the need was felt, and felt as an 
obligation, to revive the ancient threefold division; for, con- 
secrated by a long tradition and embodying old religious 
beliefs and practices, it appeared as the necessary foundation 
of every social organization. If this model had not pos- 
sessed in itself some such authority, if from the first it had 
been only a conventional arrangement, it would not have 
been reproduced everywhere with such fidelity.’?! 

All this likewise shows that the distinction we have drawn 
between the territorial settlement and the totemic or family 
foundation of the first societies must not lead us into a mis- 
apprehension of the very intimate interaction of these two 
fundamental factors in social organization at the dawn of 
history. The first village is very often just a totemic clan 
which has settled on the soil, and then the development of 
this village and of the tribe or territorial society which 
contains it results from the interplay of these two factors. 
The one, gentilic, is proper to the clan, the other, local, to the 
village as such. Territorial sovereignty, with the organiza- 
tion of society that it implies, always preserves a certain 
number of the features of the gentilic sovereignty with which 
it has been combined. Durkheim rightly points this out in 
reference to a very interesting study by Francotte on the 
Formation of Cities, States, Federations, and Leagues in 
Ancient Greece.” Everywhere we find in the primitive forms 
of the city the gentile organization, generally with its three 
degrees of gené, phratries, and phyle. But it is no longer in 
a state of purity there. Indeed, in itself it does not entail 
any regular form; for it is dependent on the accidents of 
births and deaths, adoptions, and the extinction or develop- 
ment of family groups. It could not, therefore, be pent 


PLY gl Ver be ake. *-IV, Vi, pp. B7ae: 


TERRITORIAL ORGANIZATION 63 


up within any strictly defined framework. Now, in Greece 
it always appears endowed with a perfect symmetry indica- 
tive of the hand of the legislator; each phyle contains so 
many phratries, and each phratry so many gené. We are 
therefore, in the presence of a gentile system, reshaped by 
political artifice and more or less altered thereby, while we 
cannot discern precisely in what these alterations consist. 
It is well known how in the course of history the gentile 
organization, already impaired, but only to a limited extent, 
went on growing weaker. This organization by developing 
had become more narrowly aristocratic; it had then to be 
broken up and replaced so soon as democracy was in a 
position to vindicate its rights. The best way of obliterating 
the social distinctions which had thus been engendered was 
to take territorial groupings (the demes) directly as the 
basis; it was notoriously in this way that Cleisthenes went 
to work at Athens. And yet so strong was the force of 
tradition that the new structure was, up to a point, planned 
upon the model of the old. There were always phylx and 
phratries. Furthermore, it was kinship, an essentially gen- 
tilic principle, that determined membership of the deme. .- It 
may, then, be said that the idea of a strictly territorial 
sovereignty was never developed in its full form in Greece. 
Under the new system the old system showed through, 
although fainter. 

Thus mystico-domestic constitutional law and territorial 
constitutional law mutually interpenetrate and react upon 
one another. But if perchance the first already contained 
within it something to orientate its development towards a 
concentration and individualization of sovereignty, it seems 
to us certain that this evolution was peculiarly favoured by 
the reaction of the territorial upon the totemic organization. 
It is, no doubt, not accidental that sovereignty so often 
alights upon a specific person at the same time as it becomes 
attached to an area of land. At the point we have reached 
it would be premature to speak of a genuine personal 
sovereignty, but what we are going to see is power beginning 
to individualize itself in the bosom of the communal and 
quite democratic organization we have just sketched, and 
especially in proportion as the clan takes shape as a terri- 
torial group. 


CHAPTER IV 


FIRST TRACES OF INDIVIDUALIZED POWER 
IN THE COMMUNISTIC TOTEMICO-TERRITORIAL 
ORGANIZATION 


Ir remains for us to show that a certain individual 
sovereignty exists even in the bosom of this organization as 
we have just described it. But we shall show that it remains 
truly in the embryonic state. 

If we believe Frazer,’ in accordance with a general theory 
of his which we shall have occasion to criticize further on, 
the only chiefs originally known in Central Australia would 
have been public magicians. Frazer, indeed, tells us of a 
democratic organization supposed to have existed among 
the Australians, in which the only manifest power was that 
of the tribal assembly of the elders—that is, of the chiefs of 
each totemic clan. But, according to him, these assemblies 
scarcely ever met even for religious purposes, but only came 
together for magical ends and to be able to multiply the 
totemic species, with a view to the food supply. In the 
same way in South-Hastern Australia the chief was allegedly 
always a sorcerer or a medicine-man. In one tribe the name 
designating him was also that which meant magic (mobung- 
bai—‘ chief,’’ derived from mobung—*‘magic’’). In another, 
authority passed to the best conjurer. And a chief of the 
Dieri is cited for our benefit, a great medicine-man and 
braggart who succeeded in passing himself off as the tree 
of life, and derived from this reputation an indisputable 
authority as well as very obvious emoluments. Analogous 
facts are to be met in Melanesia, America, and Africa. 

These facts are unquestionable. But what is questionable 
is the fact of selecting magical powers, to the exclusion of all 
others, as the source of the authority of the chief or king. 
It is very far from true that this idea of sovereignty has such 
a simple origin. 

+ Lectures on the Early History of the Kingship, pp. 108 ff. 
64 


TRACES OF INDIVIDUALIZED POWER 65 


It is, in truth, very complex, as we shall gradually come 
to realize. Let us, then, not shut our eyes to everything 
which is not magical, nor desire to see only magic every- 
where, and so with open minds let us see what manifestations 
Australia has to offer of a power which is not merely collec- 
tive and undivided, but which may be suspected of being 
already on the way to individualization. In this quest let 
us have recourse to Spencer and Gillen, whose works have 
to-day become classics. 

In their first great book! on the aborigines of Australia 
they deal with the tribes living between Lake Eyre on the 
south and the Macdonell Ranges on the north, and of these 
especially with the Arunta. Among the latter they introduce 
us to personages, the alatunjas, who foreshadow, albeit still 
very distantly, what under a more centralized régime— 
among the American Indians, for example—will be called 
chiefs. These personages stand at the head of tribal groups 
which, according to the tribe and the manner of reckoning 
descent—uterine or agnatic—in vogue, coincide more or less 
exactly with the totemic groupings. Their authority, based 
at once on age, experience, and capacity, is purely local and 
not tribal. It is not susceptible of extension save in so far as 
the group over which they preside grows more numerous and 
a little, too, in proportion as their renown is bruited abroad. 
But our authors expressly warn us against using the word 
chiefs to describe the wielders of such authority. ‘‘ The 
authority exercised by an alatunja is,’’ they tell us, ‘‘ vague 
enough in character. He has no definite power over the 
person of any member of his group. He calls together the 
elders, who are always consulted upon important matters 
such as the performance of the sacred ceremonies or the 
punishment of individuals who have transgressed tribal 
custom. And his opinion carries just so much weight as his 
reputation confers upon him.’’ Here again is a peculiarly 
significant trait: ‘‘He (the alatunja) is not necessarily 
recognized as the most important member of the council, 
whose advice must be followed, although, if he be old and 
qualified, he can exert powerful influence. Perhaps the best 
way of putting the matter is to say that the alatunja holds 
ex officio a position which, if he possess personal merit, and 


1 XLIV. 


oa | 


66 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


then only, enables him to exercise considerable power not 
only over his own group, but also over neighbouring groups 
the directors of which are his inferiors.’’* 

Let us note that, though personal aptitude is capable of 
increasing the authority of our personage within his own 
group, or extending it beyond it, it does not create that 
authority. In fact, such power seems to come initially most 
often by heredity, provided the heir-presumptive fulfils the 
conditions requisite for it—namely, that he belongs to the 
totem of the group he is about to be called to guide, has 
passed through all the stages of initiation, and is old enough 
to preside at all ceremonies. Within the limitations thus 
imposed the office passes from the holder to his son, or, 
failing a son, to his brother or his brother’s son; in short, it 
is handed down in the male line. 

Now, what are the essential functions of our alatunja? 
Nothing indicates that they are specifically and exclusively 
magical, as Frazer desires. Indeed, Frazer, after referring 
everything to magic, is himself obliged to declare, after 
reading Spencer and Gillen, that the alatunjas play the 
following role: ‘‘ Furthermore and above all,’’ he writes— 
let us remember that ‘‘ above all ’’—‘‘ their chief mission is 
to watch over the sacred store, usually located in a cleft of 
the rock or a hole in the ground. There are stored the holy 
stones and the hallowed sticks to which human souls, both 
of the living and of the dead, are somehow bound in their 
essence and fate.’? There already we have apparently an 
essentially religious rather than a magical office. This sacred 
reserve referred to here is, in fact, just the ernatulunja, a 
sort of enclosure absolutely forbidden to profane persons. In 
it the churingas, those symbolic reliquaries supposed to con- 
tain at once the ancestors’ souls and bodies, are deposited. 
And the ernatulunja serves as a place of asylum as well as a 
sacred treasury, which once more demonstrates its religious 
character. 

On the other hand, in a second réle the alatunja proclaims 
the ritual festivals of the intichiuma and acts as master of 
ceremonies thereat. No doubt Frazer would like to reduce 
the intichiuma to a magic operation and nothing else, but 
no explanation is less natural. On the contrary, the inti- 


1 Spencer and Gillen, XLIV, p. 10. 


TRACES OF INDIVIDUALIZED POWER 67 


chiuma seems to be a religious rite, very indefinite and, like 
the processes of the earliest law, adaptable to many different 
ends—for instance, to the initiation of novices as well as to 
the annual regeneration of the totem, and to the maintenance 
of that mystic communion which for each individual is the 
source of his being, and for the group is that of the ties of 
kinship which constitute its cohesion. 

Naturally we cannot enter into the details of the proof; 
let us confine ourselves to drawing attention to this religious 
interpretation which Durkheim’ opposes to Frazer’s. We 
take it, then, as proved that the function of the grand master 
of the intichiuma is much more truly religious than magical. 
But, granting this, the point to bear in mind is that -the 
alatunja is the minister in a cult bound by the forms of that 
cult, much more than he is a chief invested with absolute 
personal authority. Here as everywhere in this primitive 
world the sovereign mistress is custom, collective and 
hereditary custom, of whom individuals invested with 
authority are, in fact, only the docile executors. 

In any case, these chiefs periodically assemble the clan 
to perform the customary and obligatory rites and join with 
the alatunjas of neighbouring clans, who have, on their part, 
summoned the same assembly for the same end. And it is 
inevitable that in so doing the chiefs, thus assembled, should 
consult together, experience the ascendancy of those among 
them who know how to assert it, consider changes, and thus 
engender and implant the first habits of individual initiative 
and authority. There exists there, sketched first in the 
domain of ritual, the outline of representative and federative 
government in the hands of the assembly of local chiefs 
acting as ritual heads in those ceremonies, the scope of which 
transcends the limits of the clan, and which are, therefore, 
tribal ceremonies. When, as so often happens, mythology 
echoes revolutions effected by certain ancestors in the ritual 
or in some institution, such as marriage or the system of 
kinship, it is only expressing in its own language and reflect- 
ing in the imaginative plot of the legend the history of 
advances due precisely to the formation of a nascent organ of 
legislation and government. Hereditary custom begins to 


1 See especially Book III in Zlementary Forms of Religious Life, which is 
devoted to a study of ritual attitudes. 


68 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


find interpreters who take upon themselves the task of secur- 
ing its application and, simultaneously and very gently, its 
modification. 

In any case, we must be careful not to hasten or distort 
the evolution. Something resembling a true sovereignty un- 
folds itself before us, only very slowly; and this something 
does not at first appear with a specialized body. We have 
elsewhere tried to show that a law of initial participation and 
progressive segregation, accompanied by a law of dispersion 
and excess of social effort, governs the development of primi- 
tive institutions. Here is the place to apply these results. 
Forged in the religious domain, not without many contribu- 
tions from magic, sovereignty is not at first and exclusively 
political ; we shall see below that to be political it must also 
be economic, and an analysis ~will be needed to determine 
how much the power of the Indian chief among the North 
American aborigines is due to his character of collector of 
property and provider of food. For the moment we are not 
in a position to achieve the synthesis of all the necessary 
elements. Let us just state that no specialized power is at 
first perceptible among the Australians, and that in any case 
nothing justifies the conclusion that magic plays the part of 
a monopolist in the first investiture of chiefs. Let us add 
from this standpoint that Spencer and Gillen contrast the 
alatunjas to the magicians properly so called, such as the 
medicine-men. And so they tell us’ that the latter are not to 
be found in all groups, while in very striking contrast there 
is an alatunja for each local group. Magic has not, then, by 
its unaided forces created either the political framework or 
the political power, since it appears as independent; and 
according to a statement of Durkheim’s,* confirmed by the 
facts, it soars above the social organization. On _ the 
contrary, religion, over whose rites we have found the ala- 
tunja presiding, is housed within distinct and definite social 
structures as the germ of political power which we have 
detected. Magic gifts may indeed serve to enhance and still 
more to extend the chief’s power. But it is his function, at 
once religious and political—the two become confused, as 
do the categories of religion and society—which effectively 
constitutes his power. 


1 XLIV, p. 16. 2 XIV, pp. 282-3. 


TRACES OF INDIVIDUALIZED POWER 69 


In the Central Australian tribes living north of the 
Arunta, studied by Spencer and Gillen in their second book,’ 
political sovereignty is still very faintly marked. Our authors 
at once reject the expressions ‘chief’? and even “head of 
the tribe’? as premature,” and speak only of a vague local 
gerontocracy the members of which, as among the Arunta, 
possess almost exclusively religious attributes relating to 
the ceremonies of the engwara and the intichiuma. These 
ceremonies are directed by the alatunja of the place where 
they are performed. And when it is a question of rites which 
do not concern a single specific local group only—as, for 
instance, the initiation and fire rites among the Warramunga 
direction is taken, not by a local chief, but by five of the 
elders, chosen from different totemic groups who form a sort 
of council. 

And what shows how little tendency power yet has to 
become concentrated in a single individual is that these 
councils remain essentially deliberative assemblies, while the 
chief of any important local groups claims as such no pre- 
ponderating authority in them. At the most, age and ex- 
perience may ensure, and that quite contingently, some 
individual ascendancy. 

To judge by the purely totemic functions assigned to 
them, one might even consider the chiefs of the north as yet 
more lacking in political attributes than those of the centre 
proper. Among the Warramunga, for instance, nothing 
resembling the ernatulunja of the Arunta is discernible. 
Hence there is one function the less for the chief to fulfil. 
Similar remarks would apply to the Binbinga, who live still 
farther to the north. 

Still, despite these causes which tend to reduce the rudi- 
ments of authority of which we have spoken, there are other 
factors which counterbalance and even outweigh them. 
Spencer and Gillen note the following difference between 
the Warramunga and the Arunta: Among the latter we 
encounter several alatunjas corresponding to a single totem— 
three chiefs, for instance, for the three local groups which 
have the witchetty grub as totem. On the contrary, among 
the Warramunga and the northern tribes each totemic group 
is connected with a single great ancestor and recognizes a 


1 XLV. 2 Jbid., pp. 20 f. 


70 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


single alatunja, and there is no interpenetration or mingling 
between the two moieties or phratries of the tribe, any more 
than between the totemic clans. The chiefs of one whole 
series of totemic groups belong to the totem of one of the 
phratries, and those of the other series to the totem of the 
other. . In contradistinction to the Arunta, the Warramunga 
have, in fact, preserved their phratry names. It results from 
these facts that among them authority is more concentrated 
than among the Arunta. Let us not forget that among the 
Warramunga kinship is patrilinear, so that a child belongs 
to his father’s totem on the territory of which he is born and 
lives. There is, therefore, a coincidence between the totemic 
groupings and the territorial groupings. We understand the 
concentration of which our authors speak so much the better. 
It is evident that the geographical dispersion of the totems 
observed among the Arunta! is an obstacle to the formation 
of a government which can be genuinely organized on a 
territorial basis. Where a concentration is attempted we 
see mythology itself planting its traditions and enclosing 
them within the same limits as the authority which means 
to be totemico-local. Thus the Warramunga legends restrict 
the wanderings of the totemic ancestors of the groups now 
composing the Uluuru phratry to the southern part of the 
tribal territory, those of the ancestors of the Kingilli phratry 
to the northern. Each lived at home, which means at once 
at his local and his totemic seat, since it no longer happens, 
as it does under the uterine? or conceptional systems, that 

1 XLV, p. 18. 

* We mean a uterine régime in which it is the usage for a woman to go 
and live with her husband while keeping her own totem and transmitting 
it to her children. On the other hand, in cases where, under the uterine 
system, the wife stays at home and rears her children at her knee without 
quitting the territory of her uterine clan, it is clear that there would be 
no divorce between the totem and its habitat. The totemic group might in 
that case have a territorial basis just as well as under the patrilinear system, 

We call conceptional a system in which kinship is reckoned neither through 
the mother nor through the father. Under it the child receives his totem 
from the mythical ancestor who is supposed to have been in proximity to 
the mother—in a tree or rock, for instance, which she passed—at the moment 
of conception. This is the system in vogue among the Arunta and the 
Loritja—a system which, according to Frazer, is quite primitive, anterior 
to uterine as well as to patrilinear kinship and consequently capable of 
growing into the one as easily as into the other. In Durkheim’s eyes this 
system among the Arunta was the result of evolution; it had replaced the 


uterine régime, survivals of which actually persist among the Arunta. On 
these points consult the chapter devoted to kinship above. 


TRACES OF INDIVIDUALIZED POWER 71 


the totem periodically sends a contingent to live outside its 
bounds. It is now only the women who are tossed to and 
fro as a result of exogamy. It is, therefore, the same chief 
or elder who is the mouthpiece of tradition and of the com- 
munity, at once totemic, ancestral, and local. It can be 
easily understood that his voice can already carry farther. 

In his study of the South-East Australian tribes, Howitt 
gives prominence and devotes a long chapter to what he calls 
tribal government. However, this denomination must not 
create an illusion. It may, indeed, correspond to a real 
fact—namely, the political aspect of the more or less differ- 
entiated organs of direction and authority among certain 
Australian tribes which subsists beside the religious aspect 
of the same institutions. Nevertheless, it does not mean 
that among the tribes in question power is substantially more 
organized than it is from the religious standpoint among the 
Arunta or the Warramunga. 

We already know that the organization of primitive 
societies into clans, phratries, and classes represents a sort 
of communism, but an organized communism entailing a 
whole system of imperative customary rules, the strictness 
whereof is due precisely to their religious character. We 
know what respect attaches to taboo, and with what cer- 
tainty the primitive would admit that its breach would 
necessarily provoke a sanction. We shall, then, not be sur- 
prised to find that there are ministers charged with the duty 
of reminding everyone of the inevitability of such sanctions 
and of presiding at their application, just as there are 
ministers to superintend the ritual observances. There we 
have an imperceptible and natural passage from a religious 
to a political office at first in the repressive aspect of the 
latter. The fact of the sanctions being administered in this 
manner does not limit or dismember the undivided and 
uniform sovereignty of the groups; it affirms and realizes it. 
And if the administration seem to be attached to the person 
of an individual, it resides in him only as a delegated 
and partial power. But does not absolute and independent 
sovereignty presuppose a background of power of this kind? 
It is natural that we should find such to allow of the former’s 
existence. 

In what forms, then, do we, with Howitt, encounter it in 
South-Eastern Australia? Its forms, let us first remark, are 


72 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


not very obtrusive, since the author begins by warning us! 
that they have commonly escaped notice. In a general way 
Howitt agrees with Curr” that it is necessary to recognize a 
quite impersonal character in the obligatory power of custom. 
For instance, no personal will need intervene to enforce 
observation of the taboo which keeps apart son-in-law and 
mother-in-law, or that which forbids the novice to receive 
food from a woman’s hand, and so on. But when we come 
down to details we perceive that not all taboos are thus self- 
sufficient, that to secure their observance something else is 
requisite besides the feeling of horror or traditional obliga- 
tion induced by education. That is particularly true in 
respect to the positive obligations—obligations to do, as our 
law would put it—which are binding upon members of the 
clan. These, like the sanction which is often the correlative 
of offences committed against members of the clan, must 
find their counterpart in a sort of executive power. Such, 
for example, is that exercised by the pinnaru of the Dieri, 
who otherwise resembles like a brother the alatunja, of whom 
we have spoken in connection with the tribes of the centre. 
Like the latter, he owes his authority sometimes to age, 
sometimes, too, to his personal qualities in preference to 
age. He presides over assemblies, arranges marriages and 
divorces, sends messengers to neighbouring tribes, and visits 
them periodically in order to receive presents. 

To sum up, save that he is depicted as administering the 
secular rather than the sacred interests of the group, the 
pinnaru has neither more nor less power than the alatunja. 
Let us emphasize the trait, always significant, noted several 
times by Howitt :* magical skill does not suffice to qualify 
him. To say medicine-man is, pace Frazer, not necessarily 
to say chief. The one may inspire fear, the other must 
impose obedience. The rules of inheritance, also masculine, 
are, again, the same for the pinnaru as for the alatunja. 
Apart from the more purely political aspect of the office, it 
offers nothing specifically new. And all the other personages 
in various tribes whom Howitt passes in review are, indeed, 
cast in the same mould. They never possess any autonomous 
power, they are responsible to the group and justiciable by 
their peers in the tribe. “If a chief commit any offence 


1 XIX, p. 295. ele £21 Mg iy ® lbid,, p. 801, etc. 


TRACES OF INDIVIDUALIZED POWER 73 


towards the people, or if exception be taken to his authority, 
the other chiefs consult together in a great tribal assembly 
and may condemn him to death; and the assembly is prob- 
ably held under the presidency of one of them.’ If to these 
limitations on autonomy be added the fact that the office 
was, though often, not necessarily hereditary, it will be clear 
that we are not in the presence of a true sovereign, but of an 
administrator subject to recall of the several vital concerns 
of the group. 

This administrator was, moreover, surrounded by a 
veritable administrative council formed by the tribal 
assembly.? It was composed of all the elders, who played 
a preponderant réle in it, and, after them, of all the fully 
initiated male members of the group. That is, then, an 
example of an organization as ‘‘ representative ’’ as can be, 
with which a personal power is scarcely compatible. The 
chief—whom we have thus designated only for convenience— 
has his power as administrator tempered to a peculiar degree 
by this council. 

Nevertheless, he exercises it most often in conjunction 
with the council. Without considering the exceptional cir- 
cumstances in which the chief can be deposed by the council, 
we must cite the frequent and normal cases where he 
assembles it and presides. The commonest case is when 
it is a question of the power to repress crimes and mis- 
demeanours and to organize avenging expeditions. The 
tribal council likewise takes cognizance of infractions of 
the marriage regulations, of disputes relating to hunting- 
grounds, of quarrels with neighbouring tribes, and so on. 
Such is the political and legal aspect of the governmental 
organization so far as it can be dissociated from the religious 
organization with which it is so often confused. Whether it 
be a question of sacred law or profane, the nature of the 
chief’s power is obviously the same at bottom: sovereignty 
remains diffused throughout the group. The latter doubtless 
begins to delegate it to certain of its aged or qualified 
members. But it always keeps these in close contact with 
itself, and through the councils collaborates in the exercise 
of the said sovereignty, which is, therefore, as we have 


‘XIX, p, 205. 2 Ibid., pp. 8206. 


74 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


remarked, reduced mainly to a power of administration over 
the common concerns. 

Now, according as the administrator administered all or 
a part of these concerns, it is evident that his authority, like 
his jurisdiction, was more or less extensive. Howitt himself 
tells us that, when the totems are scattered over the whole 
territory, each individual owes to each local chief totemic 
obedience in addition to local obedience only in case the 
chief is of the same totem as he. In the alternative he is 
amenable simultaneously to the authority of his local chief, 
who is on the spot, and to that of his totemic chief, who is 
somewhere else. As we have already seen in the case of the 
Warramunga, the first condition is peculiarly favourable to 
the organization and concentration of power. 


CHAPTER V 


THE PROGRESS OF INDIVIDUALIZED POWER 
AND THE TRANSFORMATIONS OF THE 
COMMUNISTIC TOTEMIC ORGANIZATION: EVOLU- 
TION IN MYTHOLOGY AND IN POLITICS 


We had previously laid it down that the collective and 
undivided character of power in the primitive clans was 
bound up with the very nature of the mana from which it 
emanated, and with the originally collective and not indi- 
vidual character of totemism. For individualized power, the 
first gleams of which we have Just noted, to become possible, 
a transformation of totemism is necessary. We have now to 
give an account of this transformation and of its individuat- 
ing qualities. 
I 
Tue Data or MyTHOLOGY 


But since religion pervades primitive constitutional law 
in the way we have described, it will not seem surprising 
that the evolution of totemic mythology sheds some light on 
the transformation in the social organization which we wish 
to understand. Let us, then, begin by having recourse to 
this light. 

The study of mythology, in fact, reveals that the latter 
does not begin with the idea of a personal divinity, but 
reaches it after several stages, starting from the notion of an 
impersonal divine something. We have already had occasion 
above to demonstrate the priority of collective totemism over 
individual totemism. Let us now turn to the development of 
religious thought as Durkheim has traced it. We then find 
that what he places at its base ‘‘ are not determinate and 
distinct objects or beings possessing in themselves a sacred 
character, but indefinite powers, nameless shapes, more or 
less numerous according to the society, sometimes even 
reduced to one, and in their impersonality strictly com- 
parable to those physical forces the manifestations of which 

79 


76 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


the natural sciences study.’’! It has required a real elabora- 
tion of mythological thinking for the personal notions of 
spirits, demons, heroes, genii, or gods to emerge out of this 
common substratum which answers to the mana already 
mentioned. 

The idea of soul is the category under which individuals, 
spirits, and gods, be they the particular gods of a clan or 
great tribal or national deities, all alike and simultaneously 
come to be conceived in personal form and as contrasted to 
the immanent and impersonal spirit of our last sentence. Is 
this notion of soul, which is to play such a leading part in the 
progress of individuation, posterior to the notion of the im- 
personal principle with which we started, or are both given 
together? Durkheim’s thought is not entirely consistent on 
this point. In some places” he declares categorically that 
the notion of impersonal mana is the *‘ first stuff,’ and that 
the ideas of soul and spirit are the ‘‘ products of secondary 
formation.”® ‘‘If,’? he adds, ‘‘in primitive society such 
small room is allowed to individual personality, that is not 
because the latter has been compressed and penned into a 
corner artificially, but quite simply because at that moment 
in history it did not exist.’? Elsewhere, on the other hand,’ 
he abandons the idea of secondary and later formation, and 
criticizes Preuss and Lévy-Bruhl* for having adopted it. 
‘* From the fact that the idea of soul is derived from that of 
mana, it does not follow in the least that the first is relatively 
late in origin, nor that there was a period when men knew 
religious forces only in their impersonal forms. When the 
word pre-animism is used to denote a historical period during 
which animism was wholely unknown, an arbitrary hypo- 
thesis is advanced; for there is no people among whom the 
idea of soul and the idea of mana do not coexist.”’ 

Undoubtedly it remains possible in this author’s eyes to 
speak of a logical posteriority of the idea of soul, because 
the latter ‘‘ can only be understood in relation to the idea of 
mana,’’ while *‘ the idea of mana does not presuppose the 
idea of soul.’? But it may be questioned whether this recon- 
ciliation is quite satisfactory when it is seen to be accom- 


ATL VG ADD. Boo f, 
2 XIV, pp. 284-5, and XII (2nd ed.), p. 381, note 1. 
ARV, peal: 4 Jbid,, p. 381, note 1. 


INDIVIDUALIZATION OF POWER 177 


panied by the following argument directed to proving the 
contemporaneity of the two notions: ‘* Just as no societies 
exist without individuals, so the impersonal forces which 
emerge from the collectivity cannot be constituted without 
being incarnated in individual consciousnesses in which they 
become individualized themselves.”’ If, in fact, the relation 
of the impersonal mana to the individual soul is the same as 
that of the society to the individuals composing it, if, there- 
fore, mana is just the society itself, and mana individualized 
in souls is just the individuals, it is not clear how it can be 
said that the idea of mana does not presuppose that of soul; 
for what is a society which does not presuppose individuals P 
To us it seems more accurate to say that the individuals 
whom society certainly does presuppose, exist, indeed, but 
only in the organic sense of the word. They exist only to 
form a mass and in so far as their union constitutes society, 
but their distinct and independent existence is neither recog- 
nized nor sanctioned by religion and law. Their existence 
does not count socially any more than that of slaves in a 
society based upon the contrast between slavery and liberty. 
We have therefore still to pass from a state where only 
common sentiments and interests legislate, as in communistic 
totemic societies, to one in which individual wills emerge. 
Now, to such an evolution in the realm of political 
sovereignty corresponds in the religious sphere the indi- 
vidualization of the notion of the sacred and of the authority 
it possesses. And it is just the notion of soul which seems to 
be the ferment in this latter transformation which in the 
mythological domain culminates in polytheism. Let us see 
how this whole process of mythical creation is summarized 
by Durkheim.’ ‘‘ The great tribal god is only an ancestral 
spirit who has at last won a place of pre-eminence. The 
ancestral spirits are only entities cast in the mould of indi- 
vidual souls of which they are destined to provide an ex- 
planation. The souls in turn are only the forms assumed by 
the forces discovered at the basis of totemism individualizing 
themselves in particular bodies.’’ The rdle played by the 
notion of soul is evident. It consists not, as the animists 
maintain, in producing and explaining the idea of gods and 
all the ideas of religion, but in allowing religious thought to 


1 XIV, p. 428. 


78 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


individualize itself, beginning in the common substratum 
which we have described. 

Thus a hierarchy of divine beings, distinct and endowed 
with authority, is constituted, and they correspond exactly 
to the framework of social organization we know—clan, 
phratry, and tribe. The phases in the formation of such 
beings correspond at the same time to those of the concen- 
tration of political sovereignty. 

As far as Australian societies are concerned, it seems that 
the apparently divergent data given by Spencer and Gillen 
and Strehlow can be harmonized. It may be admitted that 
the Australians see in individual souls a reincarnation of 
ancestors’ souls. As they believe these ancestral souls to be 
themselves made of the same substance as the totemic prin- 
ciple, the individual souls, in their turn, appear indirectly, 
by virtue of this incarnation, as emanations of the impersonal 
totemic principle. Strehlow, like Spencer and Gillen, in fact, 
insists upon the relations which unite each ancestor to an 
animal. Among the Arunta this relation is made manifest 
in language: the name by which a child designates his 
mother’s totem enters into the composition of the word 
which signifies great ancestor. From the Australian evidence 
Durkheim concludes:! ‘‘ The idea of totem and that of 
ancestor approximate so closely that sometimes they seem 
to be confused. Thus, after speaking of the mother’s totem 
or altjira, Strehlow adds: ‘ This altjira appears to the blacks 
in dreams and gives them warnings as he brings tidings of 
them to their departed friends.’ This altjira who speaks and 
is personally attached to every individual is plainly an 
ancestor, and yet he is also an incarnation of the totem. .. . 
It seems, then, probable that the totem is sometimes repre- 
sented in their minds in the form of a collection of ideal 
beings, mythical personages who are ancestors more or less 
distinct. In a word, the ancestors are the totem splintered.”’ 

On the other hand, the churingas, of which we have 
spoken before, represent the body at once of the individual, 
of the ancestor, and of the totemic animal, which thus forms, 
as Strehlow says, ‘‘a joint unit.’? Here are plenty of 
grounds for admitting that the ancestors’ souls are personal 
figurations of the totemic principle, and for admitting the 


1 XIV, p. 365. 


INDIVIDUALIZATION OF POWER 79 


same proposition applied to souls proper if these are only the 
foregoing reincarnated. 

With this idea of souls, and starting from the impersonal 
principle with which it is bound up, all sorts of possibilities 
of individualization are opened up. Let us watch them 
realizing themselves in mythology. We shall then under- 
stand better how they can realize themselves in the political 
domain, starting from the undivided sovereignty of the 
communistic clan. 

In the political sphere we do not jump from the particu- 
larism of the clan straight to a sovereignty individualized in 
kingship, but concentration of power has to pass through 
stages corresponding to the various social structures. Just 
so in mythology the notion of high god is not at once 
attained. 

Men rise first to the notion of spirits which are not yet 
very different from souls proper and have local ties as the 
souls have individual ties. But if these nascent mythological 
personalities succeed in winning recognition over a wider 
social area, they are naturally going to gain in prestige and 
to represent a wider religious sovereignty. Now, there are, 
in fact, reasons why the cult of the clans should outgrow its 
narrow particularism.' It presents similar traits from clan 
to clan; the initiation ceremonies in particular include rites. 
common to all the clans, and not varying with each totem. 
It is the same with other rites, certain prohibitions, etc. 

Furthermore, initiation necessarily takes place in the 

1 On the islands east and west of the Torres Straits, Haddon and Rivers. 
have collected a mass of facts which likewise reveal the transition from 
totemic cult to the hero cult. The development is more and more marked 
the further one travels from the islands of the west to those of the east. 
The latter no longer have totems, but only traces of totems. In compensation 
they possess a national worship, the cult of Bomai-Malu, which must have 
developed out of the cult of a tribal totem, the crocodile, itself derived from 
a phratry totem. For this interpretation see Mauss, IV, IX, p. BS rac Al 
the members of the confraternity of the Bezzam (crocodiles), although 
recruited from different local clans, consider themselves related: they are all 
crocodiles. This kinship is established both by the funerary rites and by 
the ceremonies of the great cult Bomai-Malu and by various powers such 
people possess, notably that of putting a taboo in the form of a crocodile 
upon property.” ‘‘ The men’s society, then, originally confused with the: 
system of totemic clans, would have become focussed round this cult (of 
the crocodile), which would have absorbed all the rest or subordinated them 


to itself.’ Thus we see the evolution in the direction of concentration and 
its stages : totemic cult of the clan, cult of the men’s society, national cult. 


80 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


presence and with the co-operation of another clan or other 
clans. We are already aware of the existence of obligatory 
interchanges of prestations between the phratries both in 
the ritual and in the matrimonial domain. Initiation has, 
moreover, an interest which transcends the special interest 
of each clan, since it is designed to make men. There are, 
then, a thousand reasons for the emergence of a tribal cult 
to unify the clan cults.’ ‘‘ The unity of the tribe,’’ says 
Durkheim, ‘‘ cannot but make itself felt across the diversity 
of particular cults.’’ And quite naturally figures of common 
ancestors take shape to whom the invention of these rites 
common to diverse clans, these tribal rites, is ascribed. 
Hence arise religious personalities, more assertive, richer in 
sovereignty, and already stationed higher up in the divine 
hierarchy. 

But let us not lose sight of the social structure we know. 
The phratries which just represent the unity of a plurality 
of clans are admirably adapted to furnish the necessary 
nuclei of crystallization. The phratry totems possess all the 
qualifications for playing the part of the unitary god who is 
in process of formation, and for presiding over rites of a 
tribal character. For that result to come about, the eclipse 
of the totem of one phratry by that of the other is all that is 
needed. Then the latter will possess all the characters of a 
tribal god. Howitt reports the existence in South-Eastern 
Australia of tribal deities exactly of this sort—Bungil, Dara- 
mulun, Baiame, Nuralie, etc. Now, they are all phratry 
totems—eagles, falcons, or crows—and mythology recounts 
conflicts which they have had to wage one with the other. 

Indeed, the fact that the names of the phratries are often 
common to very different tribes might permit the notion of 
a deity thus constituted to universalize itself rapidly and 
become common to a number of tribes. We thus catch a 
glimpse of the limiting term of this concentration of divine 
power which we have been tracing ever since the notion of 
individual soul led us beyond the circle of impersonal 
religious forces. Behind the fluctuating fortunes of the cults 
of clan, phratry, and tribe, we have watched their usurpa- 
tion by an ancestral spirit. ‘*‘ He has ended,’’? Durkheim 
writes,” ** by winning a position of pre-eminence ’’; that is 


1 XIV, p. 406, IV, ix, pp. 179 7. 2 XIV, p. 423. 


INDIVIDUALIZATION OF POWER 81 


to say, by absorbing and incarnating in his own person all 
the religious authority which had been diffused throughout 
both the group itself and the whole line of ancestors. 


II 
DETERMINATION OF THE FIELD OF OBSERVATION 


Our path thus illumined by mythology, we shall be able 
to explain how the political power of the chief, the pre- 
condition of that analogous but simply more unified power 
of the king, of the Pharaoh, proceeds to consolidate itself by 
a similar usurpation which is to transfer into the hands of one 
man the authority hitherto diffuse in the bosom of the mass. 

But first, to show that our analysis does not rest on the 
clouds, we must indicate in what societies we observe this 
transformation. We have frequently used—we could not 
help it—the expression “‘ primitives.’? Not that we imagine 
that a people per se primitive or a mentality primitive per se 
and in abstracto exists. We indicated in our introduction 
that we were setting out into the province of ethnography 
for the benefit of the history of the most ancient East, on a 
quest for experience of a society wherein sovereignty is at 
first diffuse and then concentrated. Now, despite the con- 
venient word ‘‘ primitive’? which we have often used, we 
have not travelled into the primitive world in general, but 
to the Australian totemic societies, in our quest for ex- 
perience of the diffuse mode. We therefore were observing 
institutions and a mentality in relation to a definite social 
structure and definite social conditions. We do not change 
our procedure in order to observe the passage from the diffuse 
to the concentrated form. We appeal to the Indian societies 
of North America,’ and incidentally to Melanesian societies, 

* Frazer, XVI, Ill, pp. 251 /f., of course, draws a distinction between 
Indians and Esquimaux. He classifies the Indians into eight groups : 


1. Zlingits or Koloshes inhabiting the south of Alaska. 

2. Hatdas. Queen Charlotte Islands and the south part of the 
Prince of Wales Archipelago. 

3. Tsimshians. Valleys of the Nass and Skeena Rivers and the 
adjacent islands on the Columbian coasts. 

4. Kwakiutl. Coasts of British Columbia from Gardiner Channel 
to Cape Mudge, except the region round Dean Inlet; west coast of 
Vancouver Island. 


6 


82 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


because we have good grounds for believing that both present 
a totemism quite analogous to the Australian—transformed. 
In fact, their institutions, bristling with survivals, allow of 
no explanation save in terms of the same totemic principles— 
division into totemic clans and phratries, collective obliga- 
tions as between phratries, originally uterine inheritance of 
the totem, etc.—which hold together the most rudimentary 
organization of Australian societies. 

We have, then, the right to maintain that, in comparing 
methodically Australian aborigines and American Indians, 
we are dealing with two forms of the same organization, 
unequally developed but identical in nature, and therefore 
that we are following the evolution of the said organization 
from one society to the other. 

In our Foi jurée’ we have -endeavoured to justify this 
comparative method and the two terms of comparison. 
‘‘ Take two groups of societies,’? we wrote, ‘* whether they 
be related or no. Is it not legitimate to say that the second 
is more advanced than the first if the social structure in it is 
less rudimentary, if the social categories are more stable, 
power more organized, the classes more marked and their 
relations more complex, and if institutions—contractual 
institutions, to be precise—have assumed a clear-cut form 
while they are scarcely to be found in embryo in the first? 
Now, it is such differences that distinguish the Indian system 
from the Australian. They accordingly justify us in con- 
sidering the latter less evolved than the former. On the 
other hand, analogies in structure allow us to refer to 
approximately the same grade of civilization the phenomena 
observed in Melanesia and those met in British Columbia. 

The fellowship between the two Australian cultures and 
those of North-West America, identical in kind but different 
in degree, has been very accurately described by Durk- 





5. The Nootkas. Coasts (east or west) of Vancouver. 

6. The Salish (of the interior). East of Vancouver and Southern 
Columbia. Of the coast: Bella Coola, Coast Salish. From Dean Inlet 
and Bentinck Arm. 

7. The Kootenay (Kutenai—Kutonaqa). Upper valley of the Columbia 
River and the adjacent region in U.S.A. 

8. The Denes or Tinnehs of the Athapascan family are the most 
northerly, neighbours of the Esquimaux. 

1 pp. 25 f. 


INDIVIDUALIZATION OF POWER - 83 


heim: ‘The Australian aboriginal clans are not only very 
numerous. They are unlimited in number within a single 
tribe. The same process of segmentation which has originally 
dismembered the phratry and given rise to the clans proper 
continues without respite within the latter. As a result of 
this disintegration a clan can often muster only a very small 
effective force. In America, on the other hand, the totemic 
system has better defined forms. Although the tribes there 
are on the average perceptibly more voluminous than in 
Australia, the clans are less numerous. A single tribe rarely 
comprises more than a dozen, and often less. Each of them, 
therefore, forms a much more important group. But, above 
all, their number is more fixed. The people know how many 
clans there are, and can tell us. This difference is correlative 
to the superiority in social art. From the moment when 
these tribes were first studied, the social groups were fast 
rooted to the soil, and consequently better able to resist the 
disruptive forces which assailed them. At the same time 
society was already animated by too keen a feeling of its 
unity to remain unconscious of itself and of the parts which 
composed it. This greater stability has even allowed the 
archaic system of the phratries to maintain itself with a 
sharpness and relief that it no longer possesses in Australia. 
The tribes of the north-west coast, notably the Tlinkit and 
the Haida, have already reached a relatively advanced grade 
of civilization, and yet they are divided into two phratries, 
which in their turn are subdivided into a certain number of 
clans—Crow and Wolf phratries among the Tlinkit, Eagle 
and Crow among the Haida.”’ The stability of these societies 
is further indicated in the superiority of their industry, which 
knows already tents, houses, and fortified villages. 

But this progress does not prevent the societies being 
thoroughly totemic. ‘‘ The volume of the society,’ concludes 
Durkheim, ‘‘is much greater, and centralization, utterly 
lacking in Australia, is beginning to appear; we see huge 
confederacies, like that of the Iroquois, subject to a central 
authority. Sometimes a complicated system of differentiated 
and hierarchical classes occurs. Yet the essential outlines of 
the social structure remain what they were in Australia. It 
is always organization based on clans.’”! 


1 Cf. XIV, pp. 156-161. 


84. SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


Thus with these two cultures, at base totemic but un- 
equally evolved, we are really in the presence of two variants 
of a single type. We have, then, good reason for comparing 
them and following from one to the other that process of the 
individualization of power which concerns us. Now that we 
know where we are going to make our observations, we 
can rapidly sketch the analysis without fear of talking in 
abstracto or speculating in the clouds. 


CHAPTER VI 


THE CONDITIONS OF THE INDIVIDUALIZATION 
OF POWER 


In attempting above to throw the light of mythology upon 
that political evolution which we aim at explaining, we have 
seen the idea of an individualized ancestor in the several 
forms of spirit totem, phratry, and tribal divinity win- 
ning precedence over the idea of a nameless and common 
totem. Let us begin by pointing out how such a transforma- 
tion of mythology is necessary when a hierarchical society 
dominated by chiefs takes the place of a democratic, com- 
munistic society like the primitive totemic society. We 
have tried to give an explanation in our Foi jurée:' ** An 
individual who is a noble and a chief and who has all the 
people of the clan for clients, necessarily must appear to 
such people as the tutelary genius of the clan if he wish to 
retain his prestige as noble and his authority as chief. The 
totem, the arms, the insignia, the masks, and the other 
emblems of the clan can only proceed from him or one of 
his ancestors. If he have good grounds for saying hence- 
forth: ‘Le clan, c’est moi,’ why could he not also say: 
‘The clan’s totem is the manitou of my ancestor or my 
own’? What becomes of his authority in the clan if the 
greatest treasure of the clan come not from him? It is the 
new social necessity, implicit in the new social structure, 
that comes to be translated into mythology by assigning 
henceforth a predominant réle to the manitou and the 
ancestor. ‘To rid himself of the rivalry of collective totemic 
inheritance the chief absorbs and symbolizes this inheritance 
in himself. He gives himself out as the hereditary owner of 
the totem. And it is thereby that he becomes chief.’’ 


Here is something new. On what conditions is it 
possible? If the totem which we have hitherto beheld 
shared equally by all become the monopoly of some persons, 


1p, 825. 
85 


86 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


it is In our opinion because this monopolization has been 
favoured by the following circumstances: (1) The hereditary 
transmission and possession of the totem have been appro- 
priated by the men at the same time as the totemic clan 
has tended to become a local clan; power, therefore, has 
tended to become concentrated and individualized at the 
same time by becoming masculine and territorial. (2) In 
the course of this transformation of the hereditary rules of 
kinship, and thanks to the very vagueness which the transi- 
tion created, the hereditary method of acquiring the totem 
finds a rival in a new method, the contractual. Contract, 
here brought forth under the curious guise of the potlatch, 
that sort of sale-exchange with a challenge at the end of 
it and presenting a ritual rather than a commercial char- 
acter, competes with heredity. ~And such competition in 
turn only becomes possible in so far as the nature of 
totemism itself has been modified until the totem has come 
to seem, not so much a mystic principle which possesses you, 
as a title which you possess and exchange and hoard up 
along with other titles. (3) The practice of this exchange 
arises out of a transformed totemism, and is added to the 
appropriation by males of the hereditary principle. As 
such it favours the individualization of power in the person 
of the chief all the more that, at the same time as it gives 
rise to a sort of feudalism, that of the potlatch civilizations, 
it encounters in the domains of religion, magic, and 
economics, the action of other causes making for individual 
prestige. (4) Another structure, finally, is met in societies 
the totemism of which has been transformed in the manner 
just described—a structure which tends to supplant the clan. 
This is the confraternity. And this quasi-feudal organization 
is destined to contain the hierarchy and the personal relations 
resembling vassalage which are suited to those oligarchical 
societies dominated by chiefs in which power appears con- 
centrated and individualized and ripe for the final unifica- 
tion—kingship. 


CONDITIONS OF POWER 87 


I 
Tur MASCULINIZATION OF KINSHIP AND AUTHORITY 


We may rapidly pass over the first of these conditions, 
the advent of masculine kinship and masculine power, after 
the study we have made of the system of counting descent 
and after what we have said about the way in which patri- 
linear replaces uterine kinship. The north-west coast of 
North America offers us a whole gamut of civilizations, all 
of the same sort, but unequally developed, which allow us 
to perceive the change from one system to the other quite 
clearly. In the most northerly of these civilizations, those 
of the Tlinkit and the Haida, we know that kinship is 
frankly uterine; Frazer agrees with Krause and Swanton in 
affirming it. The children there belong to their mother’s 
phratry, and they inherit totem, name and crest, rank and 
property, from their maternal uncle. However, certain signs, 
especially among the Kwakiutl, already herald the trans- 
formation which is going to be accomplished when we travel 
farther south. Despite the uterine principle, it becomes 
lawful for a father who wants to give special proof of his 
affection for his son to hand on to the latter his own crest, 
which the son will bear beside that of his mother. Another 
symptom detected among the Haida is that the village chief, 
who still bears the significant title of ‘‘ mother”? at Skide- 
gate, is styled “‘ father ’’ at Masset. 

But there are more important symptoms still. First, 
consider the manner of transmitting forenames among the 
Haida; passing from paternal grandsire to grandson, they 
introduce, as we have explained above, an element of the 
patrilinear system into the uterine. Transmission through 
the men is beginning to be taken into account, and their 
legal rdle is emerging. There is, next, a still clearer 
symptom, the transmission of names and privileges by 
marriage, whereby the uterine inheritance is entrusted to 
the hands of the son-in-law. Even among the Haida, on 
the testimony of Swanton and Dawson, the chief’s power 
may be transmitted by marriage. But above all, among 
the Kwakiutl is this special function of marriage developed, 
and allows us to put our finger upon the transition from one 
system to the other. In fact, of all the North American 


88 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


Indians, the Kwakiutl illustrate the transitional system 
most perfectly. The function of heredity is there shaken, 
and, instead of operating in the normal manner according 
to customary use, it delegates its office to substitution- 
functions, such as marriage, or even shares it with comple- 
mentary functions, such as the potlatch.! These are two 
points in which tradition has been modified to the advantage 
of males; we need not define them more precisely. 

We have already had to record the first in treating of 
kinship in order to prove the priority of the uterine system. 
We need only return to it to follow the progress of mascu- 
linity. This is the principal fact, well attested and reported 
by Mr. Boas himself, who can but disclose it in its full 
brilliance before trying to draw therefrom the strange con- 
clusions which we have refuted: “In the tribes of the North 
the rank and privileges of the wife always descend to her 
children. Among the Kwakiutl the same result is obtained 
in practice. Among them the wife brings to her husband 
as dowry the position and privileges of her father. But the 
husband is nevertheless not permitted to enjoy them him- 
self. He acquires them only to secure to his son the enjoy- 
ment of them. And as the wife’s father has, in turn, 
acquired these privileges in the same way through the media- 
tion of his mother, it is a purely uterine law of descent that 
is applied here, although always through the mediation of 
the husband.’? There! is not the transition of which we 
spoke a reality? There is the germ of what will become the 
privilege of masculinity. 

Marriage is employed as a substitute to secure the heredi- 
tary transmission of the titles of the wife’s family just 
because this transmission can no longer be effected directly 
through the uterine line. The husband reaps no personal 
advantage from the names and titles of his relations-by- 
marriage. He only receives them to pass them on to the 
children, whose procreation for the aforesaid family is the 
mission assigned to him by the marriage pact. He is, 
doubtless, not the beneficiary of the inheritance, he is only 
its vehicle, but he is its necessary vehicle.” And it is already 

1 Cf. our Foi jurée, pp. 102, 110, 114, 234 7f. and 270 7. 

* Of course in the eyes of Boas we ought to see here a return to uterine 


right produced by northern influence. But this opinion is untenable. See 
our Foi jurée, pp. 275-285. 


CONDITIONS OF POWER 89 


something that it is necessary to entrust him with this 
mission of executor, of emptor familiw, we might say, to use 
a very exact analogy. If we have not yet reached the 
privilege of masculinity, we are, nevertheless, on the way 
thither. In the same way, the emptor familie marks a 
stage on the way to testamentary succession proper. As 
we have tried to explain elsewhere, marriage is the sub- 
stitute for heredity among the Kwakiutl. It functions in 
the interests of the waning uterine succession, and so causes 
the father to intervene in a transaction, secured at first 
without his mediation, since it was effected directly or by 
the mediation of the uterine uncle alone who, himself bear- 
ing the same totem and name as the mother, had no real 
significance from the standpoint which concerns us here. 
But quite on the contrary, the rdle devolved upon the father 
introduces a germ of change and prepares the way for the 
final usurpation by patriarchal lineage. For that result to 
be achieved it will be enough that, instead of being content 
with holding the names and privileges in question, the father 
acquire possession of them, and that from being a mere 
minister he become the author and sole author of hereditary 
transmission. 

One circumstance will help him to accomplish that 
usurpation—the usage found almost always in vogue even 
under the uterine system, which allows the husband to take 
his wife away to live with him. The husband thus lays the 
foundations of the paternal household. With the aid of a 
de facto authority he paves the way to a de jure authority 
which will confer upon him the title of chief in the paternal 
line. And, at the same time, he takes advantage of the 
local authority which he may possess in his territorial group. 
That is why we said that the process whereby power becomes 
masculine and that whereby it becomes territorial go hand 
in hand. That is, in fact, what we see among the Kwakiutl, 
where, simultaneously with the patrilinear system, the 
importance of the territorial organization obtrudes itself 
upon our notice. Its importance is just what we have 
spoken of in a previous chapter in contrasting territorial 
with totemic organization, while Boas presents the local 


clan community as the original system in vogue among the 
Kwakiutl. 


90 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


II 
** POTLATCH ’’ AND TRANSFORMED TOTEMISM 


Thus the transformation of the system of inheritance 
and the concomitant transformation of the totemic clan, 
which tends to become a local clan, finally culminate in the 
same result: they come to favour individualization by 
allowing the male chiefs of agnatic lines and local chiefs to 
win recognition for their personal prestige. But, besides 
this corner in heredity and this consolidation into locality, 
there is yet another means whereby the individual is enabled 
to assert his personal prestige in the American societies, 
and also certainly in the Melanesian, and probably in many 
others too. This means is the potlatch. 

Potlatch is an extremely complex institution, at once 
ritual, legal, economic, and social. To expound its nature 
fully here is out of the question; we must confine ourselves 
to explaining its function. It is undoubtedly an economic 
institution, since in it men exchange goods; but it is still 
more social, since men exchange goods only to exchange titles 
and acquire rank. And it is primarily and essentially a 
ritual institution, since it forms part of a cycle of rites and 
does not even confer an obligatory character upon the ex- 
change of prestations, of which it is composed, save in so 
far as it attaches their enforcement to that of the ritual 
cycle of which it itself forms part. And it is also a ritual 
institution in as much as it springs from the fundamental 
primitive rites of mutual obligatory prestations between the 
phratries. These prestations (customary dues) it trans- 
forms by introducing into them the principle of the chal- 
lenge, the logical consequence of rivalry, and by using them 
to produce inequality and no longer to maintain equilibrium. 

In its concrete manifestations, this potlatch is a feast 
given in expectation of a return, and constituting a religious 
ceremony in which both the living and the dead members 
of the clan concerned come to take communion together and 
at the same time to confront one another. This feast con- 
sists in a solemn distribution of food and presents. This 
automatically entitles the distributor to be the recipient of 
similar distributions, and confers upon him the right to 
annex part of the names, crests, and privileges of rivals 


CONDITIONS OF POWER 91 


whom he has eclipsed in munificence and has_ publicly 
exposed as unable to reply to his challenge.* Such a ritual 
exchange of competitive prestations, wherein the donors vie 
with one another in lavishness, provides, side by side with 
inheritance, a second way—this time derivative, not original, 
contractual, no longer statutory—of acquiring new names 
and crests. Personal prestige is, in fact, founded, asserted, 
and enlarged through potlatch; through it power is indi- 
vidualized. 

We have analysed the institution at length in our Fo 
jurée. Here we are obliged to refer the reader to that 
analysis; its conclusion we quote:” ‘‘ Potlatch is not the 
substitute for heredity, but its complement, and, we may 
add, its corrective. In society it is promotion by election 
in contrast to promotion by birth. It promotes the new 
men whom wealth favours. We shall find it again by the 


1 We do not mean that the gotlatch is exclusively a means used by an 
individual, the clan chief, for acquiring new names. We are quite well 
aware that it is not only an individual means of advancement, but also 
the normal expression of certain relations between the clans, relations 
which are collective rather than individual. We also know that the fot- 
latch is always described in our authorities as given and directed by a chief, 
and this must not be forgotten. This latter aspect, which concerns us 
directly here, will be found studied in our work cited above. Excellent 
synthetic definitions of the potlatch will be found in Mauss, IV, XI, pp. 
296 7f., and in L’Anthropologie (1920), pp. 396 ff. (a paper read before the 
French Anthropological Institute). We will quote the latter definition : 
‘* Potlatch is that institution, hitherto held to be peculiar to the Indians 
of North-West America, in which the clans and phratries confronted vie 
with one another in the expenditure, even in the destruction, of wealth. 
It dominates the whole social, political, religious, and zsthetic life of the 
Kwakiutl, Haida, Tlinkit, etc. It forms part of a system which we have 
proposed to call ‘the system of total prestations,’ which is the normal thing 
in all clan societies. Exogamy is an exchange of all women between clans 
cognatically allied. Rights and objects, religious rites and anything and 
everything are interchanged between the clans and the several generations 
of the several clans. That is clear, for instance, among the Warramunga in 
Central Australia, where all proceeds from the acting phratry to the watching 
phratry. 

‘* But fotlatch is distinguished by its markedly sumptuary character, by the 
usurious nature of these loans granted to one clan by another, and in general 
by the competitive character of this opposition of the clans, which appear 
to be engaging in a mortal struggle as much as in a series of peaceful 
collective contracts.’? Potlatch certainly does possess this nature. But that 
does not prevent its being used, chiefly, perhaps, among the American 
Indians, for the individual ends we have named by chiefs who are just 
struggling to usurp to their own profit the virtue which is peculiar to it. 

2 pp. 234-5. 


92 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


same token as a factor in the hierarchy within the secret 
society, where we shall, in fact, discover in it a nursery for 
the new individualism of wealth as well as a place of con- 
secration for the old individualism of birth. Thus regarded, 
potlatch is truly the social factor in a new order. That 
confirms the inference we had already drawn from the study 
of the specifically contractual réle of marriage among the 
Kwakiutl—namely, that the function of potlatch was to 
introduce mobility and change into the stability of totemic 
organization. It tends to substitute acquired for inherited 
prestige, and becomes the greatest factor in the social order 
in competition with heredity. It turns the distribution of 
the totems topsy-turvy, and consequently upsets the balance 
of social influences. It is novelty and adaptation. To the 
totemic constitutional system it is what contractual right 
is to statutory right in law. Socially speaking it is a ferment 
of revolution, since it is the herald of a new order. It opens 
the door through which the individual may stride on to the 
social stage, because it breaks down the rigid hereditary 
framework within which no scope has been allowed either 
for competition or adaption of individuals and because it 
enthrones rivalry as a social institution. It is the ancestor 
of trade and of the contract; to it, then, we must ascribe 
all the innovations that commerce and contract have intro- 
duced into the world.” 

And we compared the social function of potlatch, which 
is so patent, to that of contract in Rousseau. “ To sum up, 
potlatch viewed from this standpoint is just a continued 
social contract. Rousseau’s contract determined the social 
order once for all; potlatch is determining it at every 
moment. Further, Rousseau’s contract founds it upon 
equality; potlatch upon a hierarchy, and upon a hierarchy 
sprung, not from inheritance, but from competition, a 
peculiarity that explains the ceaselessness of the need to 
repeat it. But, apart from these differences, the deeper end 
is the same—to fix the social order.”? 

Potlatch thus produces enlargements or diminutions of 
prestige and, thereby determining the individual’s position 
on the social ladder, gives prominence to the figure of the 
chief. That this.is so is indeed evident as much in the case 
of the Kwakiutl as with the Haida or Tlinkit. On the other 
hand, studying its development from the northern to the 


CONDITIONS OF POWER 93 


southern tribes we can see that it gives an ever greater 
importance to the principle of the challenge and to the 
striving after inequality, and that it is just to this extent 
that it becomes an active principle of individualization. 
The increase of prestige is derived quite naturally from 
the names, crests, and privileges which well-conducted 
potlatches can add to those which you possess by birth. 
Adam, who is the author of a series of excellent studies’ on 
the people who concern us, explains very clearly that even 
among the Tlinkit, a people normally and strictly uterine, 
children may already acquire other names than the inherited 
uterine ones, such, for instance, as those of defunct paternal 
ancestors.2. He adds that, to acquire such names, expensive 
feasts have to be given, and that many, lacking the means 
therefor, do without such names. There we can recognize 
acquisition by potlatch which not only allows a man to win 
privileges to which he has no right by the same title as by 
murder or by war, but which also serves as a general and 
necessary procedure for vindicating one’s claim to a thing 
to which one may eventually have a right. The possibility 
of thus acquiring supplementary names is depicted as a 
prerogative not only of the rich, but mainly of chief’s sons. 
In the same way, Swanton, referring to the Haida, tells 
us that a man of sufficient rank can be inspired by a fresh 
spirit at every potlatch, provided that that spirit be not 
already possessed by a chief of the opposite clan.” This 
word chief crops up again and again in dealing with these 
people. That is because the climate, fishing, and hunting 
have attached them permanently to the soil, where they 
own durable establishments and an already elaborate 
organization. Such are circumstances favourable to a local 
organization of power. On the other hand, the practice of 
potlatch evokes an organization of the same order. Not 
only is someone needed to take the initiative in arranging 
the feast and to preside at it, but also the several clans, 
which can only be invited in a body, are led to have them- 
selves represented at the feast by persons who occupy the 
place and play the part which is the due of each of them. 
As Adam has ably demonstrated, these are often circum- 
1 They have appeared in Zettschrift fir vergleich. Rechtswtssens., vols. 


eek XXX, and XXXV. 
aol, XXIX, p. 92. 3 XLVIII, pp. 160 7. 


94 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


stances and de facto necessities which culminate in the 
establishment of a power. Among the Tlinkit, for example, 
the system is still too archaic and the totemic framework 
too well preserved for the chief’s power to be perceptibly 
more firmly established or more clearly defined than in 
Australia. It is striking to see what difficulty Adam ex- 
periences in explaining precisely of which group the de 
facto chief is chief theoretically and why. It is, in fact, a 
combination of contingencies that gives rise to the power 
of the village chief which alone counts and which is re- 
enforced in the religious sphere. But as for clan chiefs, 
our author tells us that they are equals. There is, doubt- 
less, an individual figure who represents the clan, but 
centralization has made but little headway. 

Among the Haida matters appear in a different light : the 
chief’s authority is much more substantial and more regu- 
larly established than among their Tlinkit neighbours. In 
Adam’s description we no longer find the early indecisions 
of childhood, although the chief’s power there is described 
as identical in kind with what it was among the Tlinkit. 

Despite the uncertainties of terminology which cause 
the words clan, phratry, family, and house to be used in 
different senses by different authors, it is at once obvious 
that an individual authority exists and what it corresponds 
to. What Adam calls the Sippenhauptling and Swanton 
and Frazer the family-chief is quite evidently the clan-chief, 
a chief whose authority is no longer that of a primus inter 
pares as it is among the Tlinkit. This chief Frazer,' follow- 
ing Swanton and Dawson, tells us was at the same time 
village-chief. And in the large villages embracing clans 
belonging to both phratries that clan chief who was at the 
same time village-chief prevailed over all the rest. He 
occupied the first place at ceremonies and had his house in 
the centre of the village. The clan (which Frazer and 
Swanton call the family) was, in its turn, divided into 
families (which they call houses). These had their own 
chiefs, subordinate to the foregoing, and who, like them, 
possessed power proportionate not only to the number of 
their group’s members, but also and above all to their 
wealth. Birth still played its part, but, as Adam at once 


PURVES eh 


CONDITIONS OF POWER 95 


proved in the case of the Haida and Kwakiutl, the chief 
appointed by heredity had to have himself solemnly installed 
and consecrated by a feast at which he displayed his wealth 
—that is to say, as we have explained above, at a potlatch. 

Thus, as we said, potlatch really plays the leading part 
in the formation of an individualized power. And that is 
true to such a degree that we actually see the individualiza- 
tion of power and the development of potlatch going hand 
in hand. Among the Haida we find the potlatch definitely 
segregated from the system of phratry relations, and pre- 
senting, after this segregation, two distinct varieties. The 
one is religious in character and continues to be given by 
one phratry to the other, as among the Tlinkit (potlatch 
sitka). The other is more social in character and is given 
by the chief to his clients within the clan, while it does not 
exist among the Tlinkits (potlatch walgal). Now, it is also 
among the Haida that, simultaneously with this new pot- 
latch, the figure of the individualized chief begins to stand 
out in clear-cut relief. The principle of the challenge then 
assumes the importance we had prophesied. But these 
points need emphasizing. 

Among the Tlinkits, where we seemed to catch the in- 
stitution in its least developed form, we saw the potlatch 
scarcely distinguishable from the normal collective relations 
which express the constitutional rivalry of the phratries. 
Among them the famous “ principle of respect ’’ so clearly 
distinguished by Swanton rules. According to this principle, 
the two phratries owe each other mutual co-operation, the 
one always acting in the interest of the other in the ritual, 
economic, matrimonial, and funerary domains. Now, the 
potlatch is so intimately bound up with this system of total 
prestations that it is barely distinguishable therefrom and 
still only very imperfectly serves to establish individual 
superiority, at least, inside the clans. With the potlatch 
walgal of the Haida a great change comes over the face of 
the scene. This principle of equilibrium, the principle of 
respect, yields ground more and more to the principle of 
inequality and competition, that is, of individualization, the 
challenge. 

We have elsewhere tried to sketch this evolution of 
potlatch. Beginning by being a token of respect from one 


96 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


phratry to the other, it proceeds to become a means of en- 
forcing the respect of others just in so far as in the exchange 
of gifts and services this competition in generosity comes 
ever more into the foreground ; for it becomes a challenge to 
prove one’s power of repaying it. Thereafter, the potlatch 
will not merely express the constitutional and obligatory 
co-operation of the two phratries, the moieties of the tribe, 
and tends to become a means of asserting superiority and 
prestige. If this be so, it may become useable within the 
phratry itself as a means for founding the superiority of a 
clan, and within the clan for founding that of an individual. 
Viewed from the economic standpoint, potlatch serves to 
concentrate wealth before putting it into circulation. From 
the social point of view, it is going to serve to concentrate 
sovereignty. That is just what happens among the Haida 
and Kwakiutl, and that gives the key to the riddle of the 
role played thereby, as we shall see, in building up a species 
of religious and plutocratic feudalism such as that of the 
confraternities. 

But it is primarily among the Kwakiutl that potlatch 
reveals its full import as a principle of individualization ; 
for it is among them that we encounter the true challenge 
potlatch—i.e., that which aims at sanctifying individual 
superiority. ‘*The chiefs of the different clans or tribes,”’ 
Boas writes, ‘‘ from their youth up are urged by their elders 
to excel one another both in bravery and in the prodigality 
of their feasts. This spirit of emulation is maintained 
throughout life. They keep continually challenging one 
another to see who will distribute the greatest quantity of 
property.’ Hence arise challenge potlatches, at which the 
competitors try to eclipse each other by the number of 
blankets they can display, or by the prizes of precious coppers 
(at once money and symbols of authority) which they offer, 
or by the quantity of food which they distribute, or even 
by the quantity of property which they do not shrink from 
destroying, by throwing it into the sea, for instance. These 
challenge potlatches, the chief varieties of which we have 
just examined, turn into tourneys of prodigality, the victor 
wherein sees his superiority solemnly proclaimed. 

Thus, at the same time as the archaic totemic system and 
the distinction and opposition between the two phratries 


CONDITIONS OF POWER 97 


implied in it become more and more obliterated, as happens 
among the Kwakiutl, the corresponding principle of ‘‘ the 
testimony of respect’? gives way to the principle of the 
challenge. But the evolution from the idea of collective 
equivalence and co-operation to that of individual inequality 
and competition is a continuous one. The cases in which 
it is obligatory to earn esteem by giving potlatches—house- 
building, the erection of a funerary post, initiation of youths, 
matriage—are just those in which the Tlinkit exact the 
testimony of respect from the opposite phratry. In our 
Fot jurée we have drawn attention to this agreement and 
survival as especially significant. ‘‘ The social fabric having 
crumbled away and the distinction between the phratries 
being no longer apparent among the Kwakiutl, it is no longer 
the obvious or easy course to have the services in question 
rendered to you by the opposite phratry. But, in default of 
that, you proceed to lavish on a potlatch the quantity of 
wealth and food you would have paid out to reward the 
opposite phratry under the Tlinkit system. The remunera- 
tive prestation has simply become an ostentatious one.” 


This change is of capital importance, not only because 
the practice of the challenge sanctifies inequality, but also 
because the victor at the challenge potlatch carries off as 
the fruits of his victory part of the names and privileges of 
the vanquished. There we have a principle of submission 
and hierarchy which comes to change the whole social order. 
It substitutes for totemic communism the oligarchic indi- 
vidualism of the societies we called potlatch societies, in 
order to mark potlatch as the great factor in forming the new 
social order among them. 

But names—i.e., totems which are now chiefly crests— 
cannot thus pass from hand to hand according to the fortune 
of the potlatch unless the old conception of totemism has 
been transformed. We have seen that the transformation of 
the system of kinship favoured the individualization of power 
by making authority masculine. In the same way, the indi- 
vidualization produced by the potlatch is conditioned by a 
transformation of totemism. 

Has totemism, then, disappeared to make way for a quite 
different mythology and policy ? Not in the least. We have 


98 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


already indicated that the social organization of those 
American Indians among whom we were going to study the 
process of individualization was fundamentally totemic and 
only explicable with the help of totemism. But we also 
stated that, just in proportion as individualization became 
manifest, the method of conceiving this totemism was modi- 
fied. It is now by the aid of the chief’s ancestor that a man 
participates in the totem. This participation, none the less, 
remains the same at bottom, for all that it demands an 
individual mediator. But, nevertheless, the cardinal differ- 
ence appears—men owe the totem to the chief and his 
ancestors. The chief to whom a line of ancestors is assigned 
therefore owns the totem as something which he and his 
ancestors have won, as his own possession. He, more than 
anyone else, has a right to claim the totemic emblem, and 
so he depicts it on his crest so often and to such good effect 
that the totem of the group ends by being considered the 
erest of the chief. Such is the progressive transformation 
in the direction of individualization. 

Swanton has misapprehended the nature of these crests 
as far as the Haida clans are concerned, but he clearly sees 
that they were tending to absorb all the importance which 
had once been reserved to totems. The truth is that the 
crests are totems, but totems transmuted into commodities 
to become exchangeable at the potlatch. At this they may 
be lost and won and even accumulated upon a single head, 
that of the chief. The crests, then, are totems transformed 
in such a way that they become the exclusive property of 
the chief, who is held to have won them through his ancestors. 
This transformation of the totem which caused it to lose its 
collective character, caused it to lose its religious character, 
as M. Mauss has admirably shown:' ‘‘In order that the 
totem should have been able to circulate from clan to clan, 
and to serve as an object of exchange or as a present, it is 
requisite that its religious character should be to some extent 
obliterated. And, in fact, it is essentially a crest, an emblem, 
a religious property, rather than a mythical figure, among 
the Tlinkit and among the Haida. Much less than in 
Australia or other parts of America do men see in it a species 
of animal to which the clansmen belong. You possess it 


PaEVGVAL, Dpse ac i 


CONDITIONS OF POWER 99 


much more than it possesses you. Hardly any worship is 
paid to it. Yet indisputable though these facts be, it would 
be wrong to assume that the original totemic clans had been 
without a cult of their own. To possess a totem is to possess 
at the same time a line of ancestors to whom you pray and 
who aids you, it is to be owner of the phratry’s field, of the 
special field of the family and the clan.”? 

And just there lies the novelty as we have ourselves tried 
to explain: the totem which appears more and more to be 
represented in the varieties of the crests and as appropriated 
by the chief has a double character. It keeps its traditional 
religious character and the social consequences attaching to 
this character, nobility. But it becomes at the same time 
an object of exchange and personal appropriation. Hence, it 
comes about that this prestige of nobility that the totem 
possesses from its originally religious nature is no longer 
transmitted only by birth and undivided to all those who 
are held to be descended from it. It can also be acquired 
by one individual to the exclusion of others, just as a result 
of the potlatch. Individuals who do not hold it by right of 
birth, and even those whom heredity has endowed with it 
but who no longer feel themselves sufficiently endowed by 
that right alone, have consequently a new means of acquiring 
prestige, rank, and power. And thus from the potlatch 


societies, heirs of the totemic societies, a feudalism of chiefs 
may arise. 


III 
THe *‘ PoTuatcH’’ AND THE CONFRATERNITIES 


Now, as an instrument of this new order, there exists in 
these new societies a new structure which, according to the 
season, alternates with the old structure of totemism, the 
clan; and which, arising out of the latter, depresses it ever 
more and more to a secondary place. This new structure is 
the confraternity, usually, but wrongly, called the secret 
society. In our eyes, these confraternities appear to be, to 
a peculiar degree, incubators of individualization for sove- 
relgnty. 

On the one hand, their organization, in comparison with 
the clans’, marks a step towards unification and concentra- 


100 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


tion; do not all the members of one confraternity, although 
sprung from different clans, regard themselves as kinsmen ? 
On the other hand, it implies and introduces for the first 
time a hierarchy in the bosom of which individuals may 
advance in grade and thus acquire, with the series of magico- 
religious powers corresponding to the successive stages of 
initiation, a prestige which is the foundation of their sove- 
reignty as chiefs. 

These confraternities play a particularly important rdéle 
in the life of the Kwakiutl, where they have been minutely 
studied by Boas. Participation in societies of this sort 
determines the rank and office of individuals. The latter 
gain admission by means of a series of successive initiations. 
To each of these corresponds the possession of a certain 
spirit, the last initiation conferring possession of the highest 
spirit. 

The organization into clans continues to exist during 
the summer—that is, during the time of profane life. At 
the beginning of winter, at the moment when religious life 
begins, the organization into confraternities makes its ap- 
pearance. We have endeavoured to show (Foi jurée, p. 350) 
that this alternation corresponds exactly to the oscillations 
of Kwakiutl society. Inaugurating a new system, the system 
of individualization, it cannot at the outset and completely 
abandon the old system, but keeps it for the less significant 
period of the year. Of the two alternating organizations, 
that into clans appears to us naturally condemned; that 
which is vital and effective is the organization, hierarchical 
and no longer equalitarian, of the confraternities. 

A first distinction among the members of the confraterni- 
ties is that whereby the active members, or memqoat, are 
contrasted with the honorary members, or qgequtsa. The 
first are those who are actually possessed by the spirits and 
perform the rites, dance the dances, and sing the songs at 
the religious ceremonies. The second are those who have 
resigned office and are simply spectators at the ceremonies. 
From this distinction one consequence arises which concerns 
us: power belongs to the active members, while the others 
are subject to them and are bound by strictly defined obliga- 
tions to them. But differentiation has progressed still farther. 
All the active members are, in fact, far from being on the 


CONDITIONS OF POWER 101 


same footing in their superiority to the honorary members. 
On the contrary, they are themselves hierarchically ranked 
according to the nature of the spirit which possesses them. 
At the pinnacle of the hierarchy stands the spirit, hamatsa, 
a cannibal spirit who is superior to all the rest and owns the 
most exalted masks, chants, dances, and rites. Possession 
of this spirit can only be acquired through a series of 
initiations lasting over, at least, eight years, in the course 
of which the brother passes through all the inferior grades— 
i.e., grades conferred by possession of less exalted spirits. 

What, then, are these spirits, and what is requisite to 
obtain possession of them ? 

To understand what they are we must compare the pos- 
session obtained through totemic participation, and, con- 
sequently, explain the spirit by the totem and the confra- 
ternity by the clan. Let us first note that, according to 
tradition, the confraternities originate in a similar way to 
the clans. One of the clan’s ancestors has met the spirit 
which presides over a society. He has been initiated during 
a sojourn with the spirit. Then he has returned to his own 
people and organized the secret society with all the rites 
which had been revealed to him. We have already shown 
that a mythology of this sort is just a mythology adapting 
itself to the requirements of thought in process of individuali- 
zation. The guardian spirit of the confraternity is, then, in 
our eyes merely the totem, though under an individual form 
and transmitted by the mediation of an ancestor instead of 
being the object of immediate and collective participation. 
In the second place, it is very striking to see that the spirits 
into which one may be initiated in a secret society, and hence 
the names which one may earn, are not unlimited in number, 
as they ought to be if it were merely a question of genii or 
individual spirits. On the contrary, they are strictly limited 
in number. That causes the above-mentioned division into 
active and honorary members; for possession of a new spirit 
can only be obtained by a new titulary if it has been re- 
linquished by the former one. But that also shows that there 
are specific spirits attached to specific confraternities, just as 
under the totemic system there was a totem reserved to each 
clan. Here we see analogies between the totem and the 
spirits, the confraternity and the clan. They encourage us 


102 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


to think that we are in the presence, not of separate things, 
but of two facies of one and the same thing. 

There is yet another reason to encourage us in this same 
conclusion. Webster,’ in his study devoted to secret societies, 
shows very properly that they are not just little magical 
congregations, but organs of government, political forms, 
strong and lusty. The confraternities, therefore, in our eyes, 
take up the political rdle of the clan just at the moment 
when the transformations of totemism and kinship are 
rendering obsolete the conceptions of communal authority 
diffused throughout the totemic clan, and are demanding a 
structure adapted to making power individual and_hier- 


archic. That is why it is a mistake to see in them mere 
secret societies. 


The societies in question, which we propose to call con- 
fraternities with M. Mauss, are not the appanage of the 
Indian tribes of America alone. Melanesian comparisons, 
too, may be very helpful in explaining them. The Bismarck 
Archipelago and the Solomon Islands offer very interesting 
examples. Now, from the material collected by Parkinson,? 
it follows, on the one hand, that the term secret society 


* Webster (L., pp. 74-5) shows clearly that the secret societies only have 
a specifically religious nature and function after having had a political 
role. They have begun by being organs of government in the absence of 
genuine political government. In communities where the political power 
of chiefs was still in process of formation it was they which enforced an 
effective social constraint and the execution of the indispensable political 
and legal functions. But with the development of genuine political 
centralization and powers of government their political aspect tended to 
become superfluous. Only then did the religious and dramatic aspects 
come to occupy the foremost place and the confraternities to deserve the 
mame secret societies. 

This view is correct save that, in our opinion, Webster did not insist 
sufficiently upon the fact that such societies disclose the structure most 
favourable to the formation of that aristocracy of chiefs whose political 
Power progresses by replacing theirs. Further, Webster seems to us mis- 
taken in classing the North-West American secret societies among the most 
evolved, and, consequently, among those which have lost their political 
importance. 

G. Brown (VII, p. 270), referring to the Bismarck Archipelago and Samoa, 
also reveals the political function of secret societies very clearly. ‘‘ There 
was no form of government outside the secret societies, and the only 
revenue collected was the fines imposed upon the members of such societies 
for transgressing the statutes of the societies. Moreover, these statutes 


were practically the only laws in existence.” 
* XXXVIII. 


CONDITIONS OF POWER 103 


should be used only with great caution and in distrust of 
appearances which cause superficial observers to take for a 
true secret society what is in reality only a confraternity, 
only a derivative of the men’s society. On the other hand, 
it is clear that these confraternities, sprung from or con- 
tained in the men’s society, are centres of concentration for 
religiousness and political power. At the same time, they 
naturally are centres of the masculinization of this power 
through a process to which we have given prominence. 
M. Mauss! conjectures with much probability that there are 
no proper secret societies in the Melanesian Islands in 
question save in some parts of the Solomons and in the 
centre of the Bismarck Archipelago! Everywhere else, in 
his view, the facts collected by Mr. Parkinson refer, not to 
secret societies, but to the men’s society, or Ingiet, with 
which the alleged secret society, or Duk-Duk, often coexists. 
The latter would therefore be, in most cases, only a contfra- 
ternity—that is, a new grouping sprung from the union of 
totemic clans. Within the men’s society, of which it would 
be in origin only a sub-group, this new group would be 
charged with the performance of certain rites and functions. 
Only in case one of these confraternities emancipates itself 
does it tend to form a genuine secret society. In the second 
place, it appears that in either one of these two forms, con- 
fraternity or secret society, the grouping in question is an 
organ of concentration which proceeds to individualize power 
to the advantage of the men. 

We had seen above that the progress of individualized 
power was accompanied by the progress of masculine privi- 
lege. It was, therefore, interesting to remark that our con- 
fraternities, although not to be confused with the celebrated 
men’s societies, are none the less essentially masculine asso- 
ciations. It is in the bosom of them and thanks to the 
personal magico-religious prestige which they confer and the 
differences of rank which they sanctify, that men have 
established that personal power of domination which first 
the chief and then the king are to be able to arrogate to 
themselves. 

Our second question now remains. What is the qualifica- 
tion requisite for being initiated into the society’s rites and 


DV Rr OF: 


104. SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


possessed by its spirits—in short, for being a member of 
the confraternity, or, in other terms, a candidate for indi- 
vidualized power? The requisite step is to buy this right, 
for it goes to wealth. That is the great difference between 
the confraternity and the clan, entrance to which is by birth. 
But there, too, reappears our potlatch, which is most 
decidedly the great instrument in the individualization of 
power. It is, in fact, by virtue of potlatches that you force 
your way into the confraternities and earn advancement 
there. The potlatch is the continually recurring rite in 
confraternities. To be convinced of this it is enough to read 
the winter ceremonial among the Kwakiutl as described by 
Boas. It is a succession of food potlatches and property 
potlatches. 


IV 
Power, ‘‘ PotLatcu,’’ AND PRovISIONS 


And here we touch at once upon the economic aspect of 
potlatch and upon the economic causes which contribute to 
the concentration and individualization of power. Potlatches, 
in fact, have, as we saw above, to be given in order to win 
names and crests in the procedures by challenge. As we have 
now seen, they have to be given also to gain access to the 
confraternities and possession by their spirits. These pot- 
latches, then, which are distributions, are distributions of 
something—essentially of property and food. 

It is, therefore, chiefly by means of potlatch that the 
individual succeeds in imposing his personal prestige and 
power. It is, on the other hand, riches—food and property— 
that are the sinews of the potlatch. That being so, it is . 
easy to discern the economic factor in the establishment of 
individual power. At the same time, it must be added that 
the role of magic as a factor is evident; for we are going to 
see that the magic capabilities of individuals, concurrently 
with success in trade and war, contribute to endow them 
more abundantly than others with that food and property 
without which there can be no potlatches, and, consequently, 
no advancement towards sovereign power. 

In the first place, he who aspires to become a chief in 
virtue of numerous and sumptuous potlatches must be a 


CONDITIONS OF POWER 105 


great food-provider to his clan. Everywhere and always he 
needs the most profitable hunting and fishing. Mythology 
gives us very instructive hints on this point. We find, in 
fact, that nearly all the stories of heroes begin in the 
same way: the clan or tribe is in an extremity of famine. 
Certain destruction looms before them when one member of 
the group disappears, goes and gets initiated by one of the 
multitudinous supernatural beings—spirits of the sea, or of 
the canoe, or of the forest—to an extraordinarily fruitful 
hunting or fishing and returns as saviour. Besides the pro- 
ducts of his hunting or fishing needed to relieve immediate 
necessities, he brings secrets of hunting and fishing which 
henceforth will place the group beyond the reach of any 
famine. J. Boas’ and Hunt’s collection of Kwakiutl tales 
and those collected among the Tlinkit and Haida are 
bristling with deeds of this kind. Furthermore, as we have 
pointed out,’ these myths which illustrate the personal might 
conferred by the possession and acquisition of food, at the 
same time explain the origins of the distributions made at 
the potlatch. The hero of the miraculous hunting or fishing 
that is destined to save the famished tribe proceeds in fact 
to distributions of victuals when he returns clothed with 
prestige as initiate and grand provider of food. And in 
the course of these distributions it is just the quality of the 
morsels distributed that determines the rank of each partici- 
pant in the hierarchic distribution. For instance, in the 
Kwakiutl legend of Omaxtalale? the places allotted at the 
banquet determine a whole hierarchy of vassals, of retainers,? 
as our own Middle Ages would term it. These will henceforth 
enjoy the right of participating in the distributions of victuals 
and commodities at the potlatch. At the same time, they 
will undertake the duty of assisting the chief to amass the 
reserves of wealth necessary to swell the abundance of these 
feasts with which the chief’s power and the clan’s honour 
are alike bound up. 

That shows clearly that this acquisition of food designed 
to swell the potlatch corresponds not only to an economic 
but also to a magic office. First we saw that the hunting 

1 XI, p. 340. 2 Boas, VI, pp. 384-8. 


* The French term is nowrris (‘‘ fed”’), to which English feudalism does 
not provide a quite exact equivalent.—V. G. C. 


106 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


and fishing were fruitful because supernatural and guided by 
a spirit. Harpoon, canoe, and arrow have been endowed 
with mana; it is that which makes them catch the game and 
fish. In the same way, the hero returned in the guise of an 
initiate. Not only will all the rites, the secret of which he 
learnt, be used henceforth, not only will hunting and fishing 
expeditions be accompanied and preceded in future by in- 
cantations and magic rites, but also the food assumes a sort 
of mystic value at the same time as its bringer becomes 
invested with a halo of prestige. 

Food is life and force, it is mana. Therefore, he who 
gives the food or eats it accumulates strength and produces 
life. And food itself, by an extension in harmony with the 
mystical mentality of the primitive, becomes one of the 
categories under which domination and appropriation are 
thought. You eat your dead enemy in order to assimilate 
his substance, his mana, as food. And Polynesian mythology, 
for instance, recounts terrible conflicts between the sons of 
heaven and earth. In the course of these conflicts one of 
the combatants is seen triumphing over all his brethren 
save over him alone whom he has not succeeded in transmut- 
ing into food. In the rites of secret societies we behold the 
hamatsa spirits biting the onlookers; that is an attenuated 
cannibalism which by metonymy possesses the same virtue 
as the other, and testifies to the domination of the hamatsa 
and the subjugation of those who are bitten. 

Thanks to the same magic participation, the chief, the 
mighty man, who is able to give plenty of potlatches because 
he is the master and dispenser of food, appears as the dis- 
penser, or, at least, the mediator of fertility and life. He 
communicates both to his subjects, to nature, and to things 
this vivifying mana which makes them be. Lévy-Bruhl, in 
his recent book on primitive mentality, has very happily 
described this mystic virtue in the chief’s person.' He 
ingeniously compares it to the mystic virtue attributed to 
women which causes agricultural labours to be reserved to 
them because they are the principle of fertility. Like the 
personal influence of women, that of the chief is needed in 
order that the fields may feed the tribe, as, for instance, 


1 XXIV, pp. 366 7. 


CONDITIONS OF POWER 107 


among the Mosutos. ‘‘ There is a sort of ‘ contact-action,’ 
as it were,’ he writes, ‘‘ comparable to that of a catalytic 
agent. The chief is the necessary intermediary between the 
social group and the unseen powers upon whom the fertility 
of the soil and of plant life depends. Should he fail to fulfil 
that office, these powers . . . become hostile or even simply 
indifferent, and the tribe is threatened with death by 
famine.”’ 

Evidently it may be the products of the chase, of fishing, 
or of agriculture that swell the potlatch, and the potlatch, 
therefore, may have an economic aspect without presuppos- 
ing in him who gives it purely economic activity or wealth. 
It does presuppose, on the other hand, in him, the chief, 
the magic powers to which we have alluded. Thus we again 
encounter Frazer’s celebrated thesis of the magic origins of 
kingship. But we meet them in their proper place, which 
is not that which Frazer assigns to them; for he will recog- 
nize nothing else, and refers all personal power to magic.’ 
We have already said in a previous chapter that those 
embryo chiefs who are found at the head of the local 
divisions among the Australian aborigines were not mere 
magicians, but also already religious chiefs. We must indeed 
allow magic its place, a real place. But we must not do this 
for magic only, nor must we systematically degrade to the 
level of magic rites all rites—totemism, intichiuma, and the 
rest—nor yet see only magic in the fear mana, to which a 
force other than magic contributes. What an exaggeration, 
and also what an error, to say with Frazer that “* the kingly 
regalia are for kings only the conjuring apparatus of their 
predecessors, the magicians,”’ and that “‘ the magician is the 
humble chrysalis which in due time bursts and discloses the 
gorgeous butterfly, the rajah or king!’’ Let us observe that 
even in the cases of the acquisition or production of food 
cited above, in which we have assigned its part to magic, 
magic was not the only factor concerned. If the chief 
possessed a special mana to feed his people and make their 
fields fertile, he held it from the spirits, and it, like all mana, 
indeed, as we have previously demonstrated, was a power 
quite as much religious as magical. Moreover, the distribu- 


* [But compare the reservations Frazer makes—e.g., in The Magic Art, 
(1911), I, pp. 332 #.—V. G. C.] 


108 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


tions made of this food at potlatches are distinctively 
religious ceremonies. They involve a regular ritual of 
gestures and words, they establish a mystic communion, and 
the food-quests attributed to the ancestors, the food-provid- 
ing heroes from whom the chiefs are descended, form an 
integral part of mythology. 


Vv 


Power, ‘*‘ PoTLATCH,”’ 


AND PROPERTY 


Property is just as necessary for the potlatch as food. 
And like it, property is hallowed by its own mythology. 
That is exemplified inter alia in the legend of Dame Property 
among the Haida and that of the purchase of the precious 
coppers among the Kwakiutl—of those precious coppers 
which serve at once as crests and as money, and which 
represent ‘*the weight of the name” of their possessor. 
With these symbolic coppers, which you amassed only to be 
able to distribute or even destroy as many of them as 
possible as a proof of prestige, the chief identifies himself 
in many incantations. The price which the chief asks or 
offers for them does not represent their intrinsic value, but 
his own value, the value of his name. Further, neither this 
nor any other form of property can be exchanged or circu- 
lated in response to economic needs and in the guise of a 
pure and simple economic phenomenon. In the potlatch 
societies where exchange is very active, goods are not ex- 
changed or put into circulation save on the occasion of 
changes in the status of persons. Real right with all its 
modes is only an epiphenomenon of personal right, which is 
religious by nature. Exchanges are not made for their own 
sake, but for the performance of an obligatory rite on the 
occasion of personal events, such as a birth, initiation, mar- 
riage, or death. At this point it is often found necessary 
to induce modifications in personal right in order to allow 
real right to function. And thus adoptions or marriages— 
chief’s marriages, for instance—are multiplied in a wholly 
fictitious manner merely to give opportunity for the trans- 
action of exchanges which could not be realized without 
such accompaniments. That is not all; among some Melane- 
sians commerce is seen to be practicable only by virtue of 


CONDITIONS OF POWER 109 


the epiphenomenon of a ritual commerce, purely religious in 
nature and dealing in commodities without any intrinsic 
value—the so-called kula traffic.’ 

But the prerogative of religion, even in economic matters, 
being thus reserved, it must be confessed that trade, in the 
most material and mercantile sense of the word, is all the same 
a powerful individualizing factor, just because it concen- 
trates wealth in the hands of the most skilful. It can truth- 
fully be said of potlatch societies, in contrast to totemic 
societies, that they are essentially societies of the nowveaua 
riches, in which wealth is the chief element in prestige and 
power. The people of North-West America are great traders, 
very greedy of gain, and Frazer could say of them that they 
engaged in the scramble for blankets (blankets are current 
coin among them) with as much avidity as their white neigh- 
bours engaged in the scramble for dollars. The potlatch and 
the advance to higher grades in the secret societies demand, 
besides distributions of food, huge payments which are only 
within the reach of those enriched by commerce. 

Let us, however, remark that wealth is not in itself suffi- 
cient for these rich men. They proceed to buy grades and 
titles in religious confraternities, and the potlatches they 
give, though rites of wealth, are rites none the less. This 
proves that wealth does not suffice to create social power 
whether in its feudal or regal form. Were it otherwise, the 
rich parvenu, sure of his power, would not go on to solicit 
investiture in the confraternities and successive initiations 
into the secrets of the spirits. This is because power and 
mana remain, in their essence, religious things, and the pro- 
fane means, such as power, wealth, or force,? which procure 
their material equivalent, are only secondary and occasional 
causes of genuine social prestige, of true sovereignty. That 
the individual can only usurp to himself by plucking it at 
its root, which is social and religious, as it was in the first 
communistic totemic societies. 

The chief whose physical strength, technical skill, success 
as hunter and fisher, commercial aptitude, and wealth make 
aman who must rule, yet cannot truly rule save on one 


1 See our fot jurée, pp. 187-192. 
* In fact, what we have just said of wealth might be repeated in reference 
to war. 


110 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


condition—that he hallow himself, as it were, in the confra- 
ternity which alone possesses the true power. This hallowing 
takes the place of birth when he have no hereditary coats 
of arms, and when he have such, the same hallowing still 
remains useful; for though birth play a réle at the potlatch 
it is not the high or only mistress.* 


Thus it is far from being a stroke of force or a stroke 
of luck that allows of the usurpation of authority in these 
societies. The origin of sovereignty is neither violence nor 
despotism. True sovereignty—that of the feudal chief and, 
more universalized, that of the king, of Pharaoh, which is to 
appear in the continuation of this book—has deep roots. It 
is in the fullest sense a national sovereignty, which means 
that it is rooted in the very heart of the group. It is not to 
be found at the point of a sword nor at the bottom of a sack 
of ducats. It is enshrined in the social body itself; it is its 
immanent tradition, will, and consciousness. We have seen 
it diffused through the totemic clan, then more concentrated 
in the confraternity. Here, as there, it was enshrined like 
a religious treasure, proving that it is the very soul of the 
society which thus preserves it in its loins. We know, then, 
whither the personal titulary of this sovereignty must repair 
to seek it, and we understand, too, that, if he have some 
right to incarnate it, it is only in so far as he exercises it as 
a mandatary of that collective consciousness from which 
sovereignty is sprung. 


1 Very important note.—The final process of condensation and generaliza- 
tion—the last phase of the evolution we have been studying—could also be 
studied in primitive societies and it would be the phase which would carry 
us from the feudal sovereignty of the chief to the national sovereignty of 
the king proper. But, though I have sacrificed much, I have already 
exceeded the number of pages allotted to me. So I stop here. My explanation 
of the genesis of power in primitive social organizations does not, however, 
lose thereby any indispensable elements. Firstly, regal power, in fact, 
differs not in nature but only in degree from a power such as we have 
seen forming. And secondly, we should have gone to seek the final phase 
of our evolution among African tribes. Now, it is precisely the power 
of a Semitized African monarch, the Egyptian Pharaoh, that will appear 
in the rest of this book. 

On the kingdoms of the lower peoples of Africa (Negritos, Bantus, Nilotes) 
and their tribal legal systems, highly suggestive notes by Mauss and 
Durkheim will be found in l’Année soctologigue, vols. XI, pp. 186-148 and 
317-323, and XII, pp. 149-156, 381-4, 128-132, 390-4, 142-6, 395-7. 


CONDITIONS OF POWER 111 


That is the only way of explaining both authority and its 
acceptance by the group. Durkheim remarks that in a 
general way individuals can only be subject to a collective 
despotism; for the only force that is superior to them is 
that of the group. No personality whatsoever, however 
potent it be, could by itself avail aught against a whole 
society. That is why the strength of authoritarian govern- 
ments does not come to them from themselves, but is derived 
from the very constitution of society. It is incomprehensible, 
he adds, how primitive populations should have been sub- 
jected, as easily as Spencer alleged, to the despotic authority 
of the chief if individualism were really inborn in mankind. 
On the contrary hypothesis, everything is explicable. ‘* Indi- 
viduals, instead of being subordinate to the group, are sub- 
ordinated to him who represents it. And as the collective 
authority was absolute when it was diffuse, so that of the 
chief, which is only an organization of the foregoing, natur- 
ally assumes the same character.’?! 

If it be so, to explain the individual authority of the 
chief it is necessary to observe, as we have done, the nature 
of primitive societies and the beliefs and feelings which, 
becoming incarnate in one person, have communicated to 
him their might and have made him sovereign politically. 
That is the essential point. ‘‘ As to the personal authority 
of the chief,’? Durkheim concludes, ‘it only plays a secondary 
part in this process. It explains why the collective force has 
been concentrated in these hands and no others, but not 
its intensity. From the moment that this force, instead of 
remaining diffuse, is obliged to be delegated, that can only 
be to the advantage of individuals who have already given 
evidence of some superiority in other directions. But if the 
latter indicate the direction of the current, it does not 
create the current. If the pater familias at Rome enjoys 
absolute power, it is not because he is the eldest or sagest or 
most tried. It is because as a result of the circumstances in 
which the Roman family was placed, he embodies the old 
family communism. Despotism, at least when it is not a 
pathological or degeneration phenomenon, is nothing but 
a transformed communism.”’ 

This conclusion is just; for nothing comes out of nothing 


1 XII (2nd ed.), p. 172. 


112 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 


—Pharaoh’s absolute kingship no more than any common- 
place natural product; and that is one of the first maxims 
we have laid down in these pages. Sovereignty has a 
‘‘matter,’? and it cannot be created by a mere fiat of the 
sovereign’s will. Such a will is, then, in this sense only a 
secondary cause. But history, down to its latest self-revela- 
tion, stands as a witness to warn us that a secondary cause 
is not necessarily an ineffectual cause, and that according 
as it assume this figure or that it can modify surprisingly 
the “‘ form ”’ of the ‘* matter ’’ in which it works. 


AppITIioNaL Note (APPEARING AS AN ADDENDUM TO THE SECOND 
FRENCH EDITION). 


I should perhaps insist on a factor in social concentration and individual- 
ization which I left rather on one side in the first edition of this study, 
but on which some notes will be found in my Lléments de sociologve (i, pp. 
146-163), published subsequently. I refer to the appearance of military and 
agricultural chiefs—always, however, invested with a sacred character—in 
tribal societies. It is the African material, to the importance of which I 
particularly called attention in the note on p. 110, which allows us to per- 
ceive this formation of chieftainships in societies where potlatch does not 
seem to have been an agent in making power feudal or the clan hierarchic. 
To elaborate this overcurt hint, I have explained in my Z/éments just cited, 
and in accordance with the views of Durkheim and Mauss set forth in the 
articles mentioned in the note on p. 110, how the transformation of totemic 
clans into local groupings and the transition from uterine to masculine 
kinship must have prepared the way for “ the chief phenomenon of social 
concentration which takes us from communistic totemic societies to tribal 
societies with organized chieftainships. This concentration seems to have 
taken place in the neolithic age when the tribes came together and settled 
down, abandoning nomadic life for sedentary, agricultural, and industrial 
life. This new manner of life necessitates the institution of chiefs proper, 
chiefs whose struggle for frontiers, as well as their hunting expeditions 
and efforts at settlement and organization, must make them in a sense 
military chiefs, but who are going to find in the totemic traditions, which 
they have only to monopolize and individualize, a reservoir of power and 
prestige from which they will draw the consecration of their sovereignty ”’ 
(Davy, op. czt., i, pp. 146-7). 

The Bantu and Nilotic societies well illustrate the manner in which 
centralization is bound up on the one hand with military despotism and 
agricultural organization and on the other with monotheism. Coming 
together both for defence and for the exploitation of the soil, it looks as if 
the clans needed a single god as much as a single military chief. “ Military 
power and religious power are thus the attributes with which political power 
appears when it is concentrated. Among all the peoples whom we have 
passed in review, the cult of the king accompanies military chieftainship. 
Often, too, the initiation rites, which are a tribal worship and consequently 
represent an advanced degree of religious concentration, play a pre- 
dominant part.’? Thus at the same time as the great gods are conceived 
as gods above the particularism of the clan by the tribal worship, so the 


CONDITIONS OF POWER 113 


chiefs or kings who unite tribes or kingdoms under their authority are 
worshipped like these gods and assimilated to them. It seems, then, that 
the chief is the living synthesis of all the energies, all the capacities, and 
all the rights which are latent and diffuse in the group. To prove that the 
king really absorbs everything—religion, force, property—in himself, the 
Baganda, to take but one example, represent him after his accession as 
““eating the country.’? The king is the group, he is its land, he is its 
defence, he is its religious force, its ancestral tradition: he is its all. 





ee ayy ees 


Bin, * 
rl ire re 
awe the L 
Pgh! baie ‘7 
A ae on oe 
. wy q 
way ey aay: 
1 Pack 
J 
ai 
. 
;* 
‘ 
a 
x ' 
- 
t 
a¥ me 
oe 
it 
oa . 
i 7 
j rt 
y mid df Pe 


¢ 
hye "Ber ? Wis in! 
a « 
ay ri tes 
] , 
Polen i: Ce eae 
J 
a, < 
7% y 
i 
} 
: | 
’ 
\j 
“ 
> 
é 
> 
> 
‘ 
4 ' j 
- oe 
‘ 
‘ 
v: ' U 
; 
4 7 
* ‘ 
~ (s 
» 5 
“Og ‘. 
‘> 
' . j 
%, ty ted 
- 
' 
te . i 
' 
. 
‘ : ‘ 
' 
f 7 


tl 


eit “5 


agthg * bea i, 
“4 iaty Ap md 
al + ths. ae SE 





ase ins aaa ee rahe i hal 
STs. toa Varma* Stat AA ea . 
“ie Wie RS aa, Soe a0 te. x ait al Ec 5 


a | i x ‘ 
hy teeyy, 1 shine oe ue, EY, uae me ih HS: ih: 


Peter teat » | 1 kad 


ae a he ye nee err by 


? A i a 
oe, Poe 


PART II 
FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


CHAPTER 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE AND POLITICAL 
INSTITUTIONS IN EGYPT 


I 


THE EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN AS THE CRADLE OF 
CIVILIZATION 


From the middle of the quaternary era, Man appears simul- 
taneously in Europe, Africa, and Asia at a number of sites, 
which grow more numerous with the discoveries of every 
year. But the first soil really propitious to a normal develop- 
ment of civilization and to advances in political and social 
life has for many thousands of years been found by man only 
in the south-east of the Mediterranean from the Nile to 
Mesopotamia. 

There the retreat of the pleiocene sea had left dry a 
limestone plateau extending from the Atlantic to the Persian 
Gulf. In it subsidences and erosion cut the relatively deep 
valleys of the Nile, the Jordan-Orontes and the Euphrates, 
and the parallel gulfs of the Red Sea, the Dead Sea, and the 
Persian Gulf. Volcanic eruptions bursting up along the 
cracks of the earth’s crust raised up the Peninsula of Sinai 
and spread out the lava, basalts, granites, minerals, and 
gems of Nubia, Sinai, Arabia, and Elam. Despite the long, 
wide marine cleft between Arabia and Egypt, which only left 
a fragment, seventy miles wide—our Isthmus of Suez—of 
Africa in Asia, the whole region where Egypt, Arabia, 
Palestine and Syria, Mesopotamia and Assyria will develop 
possesses a certain geological and physical unity which is to 
influence the fortunes of its inhabitants. To the north the 
Mediterranean, a moving barrier, did not offer a continuous 
obstacle. Down to a relatively late epoch subsequent to 

115 


116 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


the appearance of man, the ridges of Gibraltar and Sicily 
afforded communication between North Africa and Europe. 
To the north-east the land bridges which linked Asia Minor 
to the Greek Peninsula were not yet broken. On the Asiatic 
side, on the contrary, the Euphrates Valley is encircled by 
mountains and deserts. In the direction of Africa the Nile 
Valley is hemmed in by inhospitable sands. Far more than 
to the vast African and Asiatic continents, Egypt and Meso- 
potamia belong to the Mediterranean basin. 

From Libya to Iran tablelands and valleys enjoyed 
climatic conditions infinitely superior to those imposed on 
Europe. North of the Mediterranean, ice rivers descended 
from the mountains, invaded the plains, and drove men to 
take refuge in caves. That happened four times, each in- 
vasion lasting thousands of years; but temperate periods 
intervened. However gifted were the men whose exquisite 
paintings and reliefs have been preserved in French and 
Spanish caves, their progress was grievously hampered by’ 
the glacial invasions. Only late did they learn any means 
of existence and provisions for life beyond pasturage and 
hunting. Only after thousands of years did they become 
cultivators, potters, and metallurgists. Their social, intel- 
lectual, and religious development owing to this suffered a 
long period of stagnation. In the history of humanity they 
only count from the first millennium before our era. 

The physical conditions of North Africa and the south- 
west of Asia were quite different. There were no glaciers in 
what will be the habitat of the peoples of the Ancient Kast, 
but valleys, where the earth deposit was accumulating during 
the quaternary epoch and the river systems were beginning 
to become regular, and tablelands watered by abundant 
rains, where plants and game sufficed for human food. The 
human race found there a soil whereon it might advance 
without knowing the centuries of arrested growth imposed 
by nature. Thus is to be explained the advances ahead of 
their quaternary contemporaries made by the men of the 
Ancient East. They first devised a complete social organiza- 
tion, their hands and brains created the majority of tools, 
the first masterpieces of art and thought. Finally, thanks 
to a climate favourable to the preservation of all substances, 
inscribed or pictorial monuments from the earliest times are 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE 117 


the least mutilated among them. The memory of fleeting 
lives, which in other parts of the globe nothing could rescue 
from oblivion, in Egypt and Chaldea is enshrined for us in 
buildings, mummies, and inscriptions. That is why human 
history can and should be studied among the peoples of the 
Ancient East several thousand years earlier than anywhere 
else. 

Yet even in the favoured region of the Eastern Mediter- 
ranean, Nature distributed her gifts unevenly. As the 
quaternary period evolved, the climates changed and the 
pluvial rainfall diminished. On the tablelands of Libya, 
Arabia, and Syria, now less and less well watered, human 
life became precarious; but it kept its privileged conditions 
in the Nile and Euphrates Valleys. The first civilizations 
flourished principally among the inhabitants of Egypt and 
Chaldea. 

Of these two valleys, Egypt occupies the first rank both for 
the antiquity, the number, and the beauty of its monuments. 
In Egypt man not only appears from the remotest ages—a 
fact observable elsewhere—but—and this is unique—the 
evolution of his body, of his spirit, and of his social, political, 
intellectual, and artistic creations can be followed almost 
without interruption down to the present day. It is, there- 
fore, in Egypt that the study of the origins of historic 
civilization ought to begin. There its development and its 
radiation to other centres of Oriental culture will best be 
observed. 


II 
Tue First Human Groups In Ecypt 


The tablelands, to-day deserts, which enclose the Nile 
Valley were inhabited before the valley itself. At the dawn 
of the quaternary epoch North Africa was free from the 
giaciers which had held Europe in their grip. What we call 
the Sahara was well-watered country, covered with arbor- 
escent vegetation and swarming in game. Man appeared 
there very early. Round Algiers, and at Gafsa in the neigh- 
bourhood of Tunis, deposits of worked flints of eolithic! or 
pre-Chellean type, dated by the stratification, have been 


* de Morgan, XXXI, pp. 35 ff. 


118 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


found. They are the tools and weapons of a rude population 
of nomad hunters. Their prey—buffaloes, antelopes, and 
ostriches—appears, painted by the hunters themselves upon 
the walls of caves from Algeria to the Egyptian Sudan. The 
distribution of the paintings indicates the area traversed 
by the hunters.! They reached the edges of the depression 
where the Nile Valley was carving itself out, but for centuries 
could not settle there. 

The pleiocene sea, which reached as far as the present 
Fayum at the beginning of the quaternary, gave place to 
fresh-water lakes strung out from the site of the future 
Thebes to that of the future Memphis. At an epoch roughly 
corresponding to the first interglacial in Europe these lakes 
were drained, leaving characteristic fossiliferous sediments 
and lake terraces on each side of the Nilotic fault. On these 
lake bottoms flora and fauna developed more quickly than 
on the Sahara plateaux. About the same time the river 
waters of Central Africa, bursting through the granite 
barriers of Nubia, sought an outlet to the Mediterranean. 
After trying a course to the left of the present Nile, they 
found a suitable way of escape through the ancient marine 
and lacustrine gulf.2 A river of formidable might thus flowed 
across swamps rich in plants and animals. By the second 
glacial epoch in Europe the Nile Valley offered to the hunters 
the attractions of its waters, its plants, and its wild life, all 
the more potent because the progressive and parallel desicca- 
tion of the Sahara made human life difficult upon the North 
African tablelands. 

Along the banks of the wadis, to-day dry, which drained 
to the Nile the waters of the Sahara and formed each one a 
way of entry, the hunters pitched temporary camps and 
established their workshops for arms and implements of 
chipped flint. There and on the lake terraces in the valley 
the palxolithic stations have been discovered, and these have 
yielded by the thousand hand-axes, celts, arrow-heads, har- 
poons, and hammer-stones of the type which will be called 
Chellean and Acheulean.’ Attracted by the water, hunting 


1 Boule, Z’Anthr., XIII (1902), p. 109; Schweinfurth, Zeztschr. /. Ethnog., 
XXXIX (1907), p. 889; XLIV, p. 627. 

2 Blenckenhorn, ‘‘ Geschichte des Nil-Stroms” (in Zettschr. d. Gesell. f. 
Erdkunde, 1902). 

3 de Morgan, XXXI, p. 36. 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE = 119 


and fishing, the nomads descended into the valley. Kept 
there by the easier life due to the animals, fish, and wild 
plants, they began to make permanent settlements. Under 
the river terraces their flints and the bones of the buffaloes 
and elephants which they ate have been unearthed. 

To this period of the first sedentary establishments in 
the valley those stations termed mesolithic by de Morgan’ 
should correspond. But nothing, or hardly anything, has 
come down to us from them. There lies a still unsolved 
problem in Egypt; the several stages in the development of 
the age of stone, chipped, flaked, polished, etc., are not met. 
We pass abruptly from paleolithic stations to neolithic 
stations, which are better termed chalcolithic, since copper 
and gold already appear in them.’ If the intermediate stages 
are lacking, nothing proves that they did not exist at all. 
It is more likely that the traces of them are and will remain 
inaccessible to excavators, and the reason is this: Man had 
already been settled in the valley for several thousand years 
when, about the time of the last glacial period in Europe, 
the Nile’s cycle of annual floods and alluvial depositions 
became definitely established. For man the result was such 
an improvement in the soil that agriculture and all that it 
entails became his principal occupation and finally attached 
the race to the land. 

With agriculture began an evolution in_ paleolithic 
industry ; then came the utilization of clay, crude or baked, 
the invention of pottery. But the ruins of the villages and 
cemeteries which would have preserved for us the traces of 
this intermediate age were gradually buried in silt; for the 
deposit, insignificant in any single year, assumes gigantic 
proportions when the unit of measurement is a thousand 
years. Where deep soundings have been made, for instance, 
at the mouth of the Delta, pottery and bricks, and at 
Damietta even a skull,* appeared at a depth of twenty or 
thirty metres in the silt. According to probable estimates, 
these potters were living there 16,000 years ago.* It is likely 
that they represent the population intermediate between the 


1 de Morgan, XXXI, p. 73. ATOLL Dp wil, OO. 
® Schweinfurth, quoted by Blenckenhorn, Zeztschr. d. Gesell. ¢. Erdkunde, 
(1902), p. 761. 


4 Breasted, XXV (Nov., 1919), p. 307. 


120 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


paleolithic men of the desert and the chalcolithic people of 
the following age. But, of course, methodical soundings will 
be needed to establish this hypothesis and these si eet 
on a surer footing. 

With the chalcolithic stations we return once more to 
firm ground. Since 1895, J. de Morgan, G. Legrain, E. 
Amélineau, Flinders Petrie, Quibell, and many others have 
found them distributed all along the Nile Valley,’ but always 
on the edge of the sands on the border-line between cultivated 
land and desert. When the inhabitants of the valley had 
learned by centuries of experience that the flood and the 
silt recurred every year, they removed their villages and 
cemeteries beyond the reach of the waters and the mud. 
This has allowed us to discover their graves at Negada, 
Abydos, and El-Amrah. 

These chalcolithic stations—their approximate date is, at 
latest, about 5000 s.c.?—disclose contracted skeletons sur- 
rounded with vases, sculptured palettes, weapons, tools, and 
offerings of food. Since the paleolithic epoch the advance 
appears enormous. Knives with symmetrical double fiak- 
ings, flint bracelets and arrow-heads are admirable, both as 
implements and as works of art, and are superior to anything 
neolithic man has produced in other countries.* Vases of 
hard rock, and a pottery presenting a wealth of forms and 
technical processes, illustrate the development of industry. 
Pins, chisels, and vases of copper, and gold jewels announce 
the definite discovery of metals.* Bones and animal skins, 
as well as the scenes engraved on the palettes, prove that 
the hunters pursued, as well as game, species susceptible of 
domestication—dogs, gazelles, sheep, cattle, and asses—so 
as to lighten human labour and create reserves of food. 
Grains of barley, millet, and wheat found in the stomachs of 
the corpses and in the kitchen-middens (kjekkenmeeddings) 
show that the fields were tilled and varieties of plants 
selected.” Moreover, hoes and ploughshares of flint occur 
among the artifacts. 

Are all these inventions due to the patient genius of the 
neolithic Egyptians? Or were they in part inspired from 

1 de Morgan, XXXII; ¢f. Moret, XXVIII, PEgypte avant les pyramides, 


* de Morgan, XXXI, p. 100. 8 Jbid., pp. 88, 92. 
* feta. 2.00. “bid; Part 43; ciapi oe 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE = 121 






cit 








$ aN 
Wty, ‘ aa is 
Utiayy,, an ef 
WALES 3) Uae er 
3 (“Wad umilat 
A fy : 
Gizerrs(SHeliopolis } 
Sakkarahe\ = 
Memphis = 
eh Dahchur 
eye LES. c 
SA Mo: =n 
Fayum ~~ Je a oy, 
fede > DP wy 
va fs 
b> ° . fe 
ee 3 Sinat fs 
4 
o 
z \! o ooo SN 
3 , 
V4 
bo Bly 
e on c+ 
Lé2) “2p 
5 % 
ce % 





“Coptos~¢ oer 
= Thebes ' 
3 = : 
Oasis of Nekhen&Nekheb o 
Dakhel (Hierakonpolis' Edfu ec 


. 







six 


Wy yyy 


Cs 
Oasis of El Khargeh 


*Assouan 
ract 







Hr Nyy 


Minin, 


UMN 


Map I.—ArRcHAIC EGYPT. 


122 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


abroad? That is a highly controversial question, and a 
discussion of it will be more in place in Chapter II. Let it 
suffice to say here that there is not the least need to invoke 
an invasion from Asia to explain the growth of the chalco- 
lithic culture of Egypt. No doubt men existed in Hither 
Asia and Europe, contemporaries of these first Egyptians, 
but it is open to doubt whether they had yet reached an 
equal or higher level of civilization. 

Nowhere else had natural conditions favoured the 
development of a human society to the same extent as in 
Egypt. Nowhere else do we find a chalcolithic industry 
comparable in its technical perfection. Moreover, apart from 
some stations of uncertain age in Palestine, no trace of man 


ATTN 


BaAs 


ae4 . 
Cr fo \ 
Wm mA 


Fic. 1.—BOAT SURMOUNTED BY AN ENSIGN. 


earlier than 4000 B.c. exists in Syria or Mesopotamia. By 
that date the Egyptians had their feet on the threshold of 
their history proper. It is, then, reasonable to attribute the 
precocious development of Egypt’s first inhabitants to their 
own genius and to the exceptional conditions presented by 
the Nile Valley. Nothing proves that it was due to the 
incursion of more civilized strangers. The very existence of 
such, or at least of their civilization, remains to be proved. 
On the other hand, everything goes to show that the connec- 
tions and intercourse between these first inhabitants of the 
Nile Valley and the population of Asia were already frequent. 
To that extent it may be admitted that important elements 
of material culture may have reached Egypt from Asia and 
Arabia. 


Such advances could not have been achieved without the 
shelter of some social and political organization, at least an 
elementary one. Few features of it can be detected, for 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE © 123 


writing did not yet exist to leave behind explicit evidence 
thereof. Still, on clay vases, and more rarely on the walls 
of tombs, painted scenes already appear. There we see boats 
and buildings surmounted by heraldic effigies—a falcon, an 
elephant, a solar disc, crossed arrows, or mountains (Figs. 
1-2). Many of these emblems remained in use down to the 
close of Pharaoniec civilization as the names of provinces or 
nomes (voyo.). It is, therefore, not overbold to assign to 
them a social meaning even in prehistoric times. These 
ensigns are evidently ‘‘ ethnic emblems,’’ as Victor Loret! 
has recognized; their presence indicates the existence of 
human groupings the rallying signs whereof we know. 

Here a preliminary remark seems requisite. Egypt is a 
very small country. From the First Cataract to the Delta 


the valley, with all its windings, is 490 miles long, but its 
breadth is trifling: at the widest point the distance between 
Nile and desert on each bank does not exceed 92 miles. On 
the other hand, the Delta spreads out in a fan 373 miles broad 
along its lower edge. The total arable surface in Egypt is 
scarcely as large as Sicily. The population, which multiplied 
rapidly along this strip of fertile soil, must, therefore, have 
formed dense and compact groups, the future Egyptian 
nomes. 

As in all agricultural countries exposed to sudden attacks 
from nomads, the sedentary peasants did not dwell in 
scattered huts. By night they gathered behind the solid 
walls of villages, where they left their families and treasures 
in safety when they went forth to their fields. Each village 
planted above its fortified gates an ensign—fetish, talisman, 
rallying sign—with which the barques that cruised upon the 
Nile were likewise decked. In these villages the hunters and 


1 XXVII, 121; XXIX, 144. 


124 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


tillers had come together for reasons of defence, mutual aid, 
and collective safety. Beyond doubt they felt the ascendancy 
of those among them who were distinguished by strength, 
intelligence, wealth, and also by magic knowledge: talismans 
and magicians’ or sorcerers’ wands are among the oldest 
objects found in prehistoric graves.’ It is probable that such 
men, rich and tried, formed councils of elders of the type 
of those which appear at the dawn of political institutions 
among primitives. 

Sir James Frazer describes the first organization known 
to races at the bottom of the human scale in the following 
terms: ‘* The aborigines of Australia . . . are ruled neither 
by chiefs nor kings. So far as their tribes can be said to 
have a political constitution, it is a democracy or, rather, 
an oligarchy of old and influential men, who meet in council 
and decide on all measures of importance, to the practical 
exclusion of the younger men. Their deliberative assembly 
answers to the Senate of later times; if we had to coin a word 
for such a government of elders we might call it a geronto- 
cracy.’’? It is impossible not to recollect that in the Egypt 
of the Pharaohs there existed at all periods Councils of Elders 
called Saru (the princes, the great ones),’? to which the 
religious texts from the Pyramids attribute an origin prior to 
any political organization, in the society of the gods who, 
according to Egyptian traditions, inhabited Egypt before 
men. The first organized body had been governed by a king 
(nsut) and by Saru.* Gerontocracy, therefore, begins very 
far back in Egyptian traditions; it dated back, very likely, 
to the time of the chalcolithic villages (cf. Davy, pp. 57, 73, 
above). 

Grouped thus in villages, perhaps forming clans, lived 
those who devoted themselves to the rough task of improving 
the oasis of Egypt. It took them centuries to derive from 
hard-earned experience the inventions and methods necessary 
for cultivation in a valley subject to periodic floods. If the 
river brings ‘‘ the water of life’’ to the soil, we must not 
forget that at the moment of the overflow it drowns and 

de Morgan, XXXI, Fig. 47, ivory. 

J. G. Frazer, Lectures on the Early History of the Kingshtp, p. 107. 


1 

2 

8 A. Moret. C.R. Acad. des inscrips. (1916), p. 378. 
¢ Pyramid of Pepi II, 1230, ed., Sethe, § 1041. 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE = 125 


destroys everything; hence the need for raising roads and 
villages above it on causeways or artificial mounds. When 
the water subsided, it followed capricious détours or spread 
out in marshes. What was to be done then? The river must 
be banked, the fleeting waters’ presence prolonged by retain- 
ing them in reservoirs, crude elevating machines devised for 
diffusing the water on the land, irrespective of the level of 
the stream, and an interminable network of irrigation canals 
dug. Yet there were other essential tasks—to drive out the 
wild beasts from the valley; to choose the animals suitable 
for taming, to break in ox, sheep, and ass; to till the soil 
with the mattock and then with a flint plough, drawn at first 
by the hand of man, later by oxen; to select plant species ; 
to obtain barley, millet, wheat, and the vine; to develop flint 
and ceramic industries; to cut hard stones; to find out the 
secrets of casting copper and gold. To this prodigious labour 
we may assign a period of at least 1,500 years (before 3500 
B.c.).. The result of these centuries of discipline is civiliza- 
tion visible for the first time on the earth. The population 
who had achieved it lived under a social system of which the 
tribal ensigns are the only marks to tell the tale. 

From this chalcolithic epoch the primitive graves have 
preserved some corpses till our days. The race was of 
moderate stature, of slender figure. The face is long, the 
skull narrow ; the eyes were black, the hair black, not woolly. 
There is not a trace of the negroid type; on the contrary, 
everything goes to show a kinship with that South European 
population which Sergi calls the Mediterranean race.’ 


III 
First Historica PERIOD 


From the end of the fourth millennium Egypt was march- 
ing towards the decisive transformation; the chalcolithic 
industries gave birth to a true civilization; the groupings of 
men in villages or clans were united to form first States or 
kingdoms, and then one single kingdom. About the same 
time writing assumed definite shape and combined phonetic 
signs with the ideographic signs, thus increasing a hundred- 


1 Cf. de Morgan, XXXI, p. 126. 2 Breasted, XXV, p. 428. 


126 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


fold the resources of the old picture writing. Thenceforth 
memories of events could be preserved in other ways than 
by oral tradition; acquired experience was handed down; 
history and political tradition were created. For the first 
time in the evolution of humanity we reach a historical 
period on which we are informed by a written tradition and 
contemporary monuments, and which is connected by an 
unbroken chain of witnesses to the modern epoch. The 
framework of this tradition has been established by Egyptian 
annalists to whom we owe the royal Turin Papyrus and 
the Ptolemaic compilers such as Manetho, some using royal 
families, some dynasties, as bases from the beginnings till the 
latest phase. We shall only trace the main outlines here, 
reserving to a later volume the history of Egyptian civiliza- 
tion,” and so we deal only with Egypt’s place in the develop- 
ment of the Ancient World of the Orient. 

On approaching the historical period the question of 
chronology inevitably arises. We shall describe in our book, 
The Nile and Egyptian Civilization, the materials with which 
we can reconstitute this chronology in Ancient Egypt; it will 
always be vague enough, especially in respect of the period 
of the beginnings. However, we have in our hands the 
means of purifying the fabulous estimates handed down by 
Manetho, whose text has been corrupted by the Christian 
chronographers who have preserved him to us.’ Exact and 
certain dates obtained by astronomical calculations allow us 
to desecry here and there some sure landmarks and to calcu- 
late the duration of the dynasties, sometimes with certitude, 
more often approximately. The result is a chronology 
** shorter than that traditionally accepted down to the last 
few years.’”* 

An astronomical date allows the beginning of the XIIth 
Dynasty to be fixed at 2000 s.c. Now, the Turin Papyrus, 
an official Egyptian authority, assigns 955 years to the sum 
total of the reigns of the Ist to the VIIIth Dynasties ; leaving 
360 years for Dynasties IX to XI, according to dating 
vouched for by the monuments, we reach a total figure of 


1 XXII, §§ 150-154. 

2 A. Moret, The Nile and Egyptian Civilization. 

8 Ed. Meyer, XXIII. 

* de Morgan (XXXI, p. 100) remains faithful to the long chronology. 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE _ 127 


id 






Fic. 3.—TuHE ENSIGNS OF THE FALCON AND OF THE EAST LEAD AN EGypTIAN CLAN TO THE HUNT. 
(Slate palette, Louvre and British Museum ) 
(J. Capart, Les Débuts de Part en Egypte, vol. I.) 


128 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


1,315 years to determine the period prior to Dynasty XII 
within a limit of error of a century or so. Upon this pre- 
sumption the beginning of the Ist Dynasty is fixed about 
3315; or, more roughly, between 3400 and 3200 B.c.’ 


This Ist Dynasty, which marked the foundation of a 
centralized State, had been preceded by a long preparatory 
period in which the Egyptians had sought for an effective 
social organization to ensure the security and regularity of 
social labour in the valley. The tradition preserved by the 
Turin Papyrus and Manetho attributes the creation of 
political institutions to divine dynasties in which the high 
gods of Pharaonic Egypt, Ra and Enneades, figure; they are 
said to have reigned for hundreds of thousands of years 
before Menes. The gods were succeeded by kings dwelling 
in Lower Egypt, and then by a family of sovereigns of Upper 
and Lower Egypt, called the Followers of Horus. After 
them came Menes and the Ist Dynasty. Apart from the 
fabulous figures, real historical elements lie hidden beneath 
the veil of this pious allegory. 

The figured monuments of this epoch anterior to Menes 
show us plenty of beings acting as protectors of men. But 
they are not Ra, Osiris, or Horus, the great divine figures of 
the historical epoch. These patrons are a falcon, a vulture, 
a hare, a scorpion, a fish, a solar disc, two crossed arrows, 
and so on;* that is to say, the ensigns of the chalcolithic 
villages already illustrated on the vases. It is probable that 
these ensigns were not yet gods to whom men were linked by 
religious ties. They were at least fetishes, and exercised over 
the men of each clan a social influence which explicit monu- 
ments now allow us to define. 

The predynastic graves have preserved schist palettes 
which bear engraved scenes. On them we sce these same 
fetishes—the falcon, fish, scorpion, lion, jackal, bow, arrow— 
but no longer inert and lifeless as they were on the ensigns 
of the chalcolithic boats and villages. Now they have 
descended from their pedestals; they lead men to the chase 
and to the combat (Fig. 8). With the human hands where- 
with the primitive artists’ imagination has endowed them 


1 XXII, § 163. 
* V. Loret in VIII, vol. X (1902); cf. Moret, XXIX, 154. 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE — 129 


they wield weapons to slay the clan’s adversaries, cords to 
bind the prisoners, mattocks to destroy the fenced villages 
of the foe.’ From this epoch we can assert that the animal 
or emblem which serves as standard for the village, and 
probably gave its name to it (as it will later to the nome), 
plays the réle of protector of the human aggregate, which 
seems hereafter to present the aspect of a tribe or clan. In 
the middle of the huts rises a wattle and daub structure 
not altogether without architectural pretensions, the outline 
of which already foreshadows what is to be a naos in the 
Pharaonic period. It is the first draft of the temple, as 
the fetish is the first attempt at a provincial god. That is 
the new element—a very important one—in the social life 
of the Nile dwellers: beside or above the village elders 
appears the guardian fetish, who with the lapse of centuries 
will become the god of the nome, and later will enter the 
solar or Osirean pantheon. 

Is that the historical fact which lies hidden behind 
the fable of the divine dynasties? The Egyptians of the 
Pharaonic epoch would in that case have substituted the 
names of the high gods of the historic period for those very 
imperfect sketches of divinities who really ruled men at the 
beginning of time. In any case, the political and social 
system which corresponds to fetishism has nothing in 
common with that of a divine dynasty, which is a monarchy 
already matured. It is probable that predynastic Egypt 
between 4500 and 3500 g.c. had not advanced beyond the 
stage in which so many primitive societies are still left—the 
system of the clan protected by a fetish or totem. Hence it 
must be asked whether the relations between the Egyptians 
and their sacred patrons were those of clansmen and their 
totem—1t.e., the equalitarian and communistic régime of the 
totemic clan (cf. supra, p. 14). The question cannot be 
discussed at this point, in default of express documents 
dating from the epoch we have reached. It will meet us 
once more when we come to describe the survivals of older 
traditions in the first monarchical institutions of dynastic 
Egypt. 

We can at least refer to these remote ages the division of 
the valley into geographical provinces, in which the popula- 


1 de Morgan, XXXI, Fig. 181. 
9 


180 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


tion was grouped about a village more important than the 
rest, where the market, the tribunal, the naos of the fetish, 
and the dwelling of the chief or chiefs were situated. The 
clans have become territorial groupings, of which the names 
—Falcon, Gazelle, Jackal, Lapwing, Terebinth, Snake’s 
Mountain, Sceptre, Sistrum, Bull, etc.—were preserved by 
the nomes, the clans’ heirs. The historian Eduard Meyer 
says: ‘* We find in Egypt no trace of those human groupings 
which we meet everywhere else at the beginnings of societies, 
and which remain in vogue among other Hamitic peoples. 
We find neither tribes nor names of tribes—besides, the 
Egyptians did not even have an (ethnic) name to denote 
their people as a whole—we find neither family alliances nor 
blood feuds. . . .””'. No doubt. Nevertheless, the grouping 
of villages around fetishes, which will later be the gods of 
nomes, presents every appearance of a continuation of the 
clans, wherein the people lived under the egis of fetishes and 
under the guidance of elders, those Saru whom tradition 
made the chiefs of Egypt in the days before kings. The clan, 
become a village, occupies a district called after it (cf. 
supra, p. 56). 

With this reservation, we shall say with Meyer: ‘‘ The 
sole division the Egyptian’s State knows is purely territorial. 
It is not the people who are divided into groups, but the land 
which is cut up into districts. . . .1_ So the nomes were the 
primitive cells from which sprang the greater States. They 
correspond to aggregations of tribes among people who are 
still on the threshold of civilization. ... Each of these 
principal cells of the social body had undergone an individual 
historical development in religion and customs and had pre- 
served this character in a very marked and lasting manner. 
They kept themselves alive throughout all the transforma- 
tions of Egyptian history, and whenever the State grew weak 
the kingdom relapsed into its division into nomes,’”2 


On the prehistoric schist palettes scenes of conflicts 
between men bearing different ensigns, who are therefore 
rivals, often figure. There were therefore wars between the 
fetishes and the inhabitants of the nomes. Sometimes we 
observe groups of fetishes fighting against rival groups; so 


1 XXII, § 176. 3 401d., 3177. 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE = 131 


there had been at a very early date confederations of nomes 
or attempts at hegemony.’ Limited political and territorial 
groupings certainly preceded any other effort towards unifi- 
cation. They culminated in the formation of two kingdoms, 
one for each of the essential divisions of the country—North 
and South, Upper and Lower Egypt. Such is the tradition 
common to the Turin Papyrus and Manetho, which is con- 
firmed by the Palermo Stone and numerous allusions in the 





Pschent. Red Crown with White Crown with 
Urezus. Ureus. 





Crook. Whip. Royal Weapon (Khepesh), 


Fic. 4.—EGYpTiaAN REGALIA. 


historical and religious texts of the Pharaonic period. From 
these later authorities we learn that the city of Buto (Eg., 
Pe) in Lower Egypt was the political and religious capital of 
the North. Here the chiefs adopted the name biti, expressed 
in writing by the bee sign, which was to become the typical 
ideogram characteristic of the kings of the North, or Lower 
Egypt.” As ‘‘ speaking arms,’’ the kingdom of the North 
took the papyrus (waz), which grows luxuriantly in the Delta 
and formed the staple diet of its inhabitants. The king was 


1 V. Loret quoted in VIII, vol. X, pp. 176 7. 
4 Pyramid of Pepi I, i, 684: ‘‘ The dzt7u who are in Pe=the kings of the 
North who dwell at Buto. 


132 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


distinguished from other men by a red cap very high at the 
back and decorated in front by a spiral. This was a talisman 
inhabited by a goddess, the serpent Wazet, who dwelt at 
Buto. This snake coiled itself round the king’s head and 
inspired beholders with terror. 

As for Upper Egypt, or the South, its capital lay at 
Nekheb (El-Kab, on the right bank of the Nile), where a 
great brick enclosure, dating, perhaps, from this period, 
survives to-day. This chief called himself Nswt, expressed 
in hieroglyphics by the sign of a liliaceous plant, which was 
to be the ideogram characterizing the kings of the South, or 
Upper Egypt. The realm of the South also adopted “ speak- 
ing arms ’’—the lily and the lotus (nekheb). Its king was 
crowned with a white mitre. It was defended by a vulture 
goddess, Nekheb, who, hovering above the king, protected 
him with her outspread wings. From this will arise the 
crown of the South and the guardian deity of Upper Egypt.! 
The two crowns combined will form the Pschent, the symbol 
of the two Egypts united in one. 

The extreme importance attached by the kings of the 
Pharaonic period to the crowns, and the divine life which 
they bestow even thousands of years later, compel us to 
admit that the red cap and the white mitre in primitive times 
possessed all the magic virtue which the primitives of to-day 
still ascribe to the royal insignia. Sir James Frazer quotes 
numerous texts showing that such insignia are reputed to 
work miracles; for the kings are bearers of talismans which 
ensure a Magic power over men and Nature.” 

We know nothing of the history of these early kingdoms. 
Yet tradition alleges that the kings of the North had a pre- 
eminence over the rest of Egypt at the beginning of time. 
No text allows us to delimit their zone of influence ; but the 
religion of later days indicates that such influence was pro- 
found. This is explained by the exceptional fertility of the 
Delta. So soon as it could be made fit for cultivation by 
dint of embanking and draining and irrigating, this stretch 
of earth, repeatedly renewed by the Nile silt, offered a wider 
area, a more productive soil, and a more favourable habitat 


* On the images and titles, see Moret, XXX, chaps. i, ii. 


* OP. cit., p. 180; vide supra, p. 107 for M. Davy’s interpretation of these 
facts. 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE = 1338 


to the growth of a prolific race, than the narrow valley of 
Upper Egypt. The result was a precocious material pros- 
perity and intellectual development, attested by the fact that 
the great gods of the Delta later imposed their authority on 
the rest of Egypt. The sun, Ra, was first worshipped at 
Heliopolis ; Osiris (who personified the Nile and vegetation), 
Isis, and Horus are the gods of Busiris, Mendes, and Buto.’ 
The extension of their worship over the whole valley in very 
early times indicates a corresponding political influence from 
the Delta. This religious development also bears witness to 
the advance in the popular mentality: the fetishes become 
gods, magic evolves towards religion, the chiefs are trans- 
formed from sorcerers, as they had been, into priest-kings, 
while political power, once divided and diffuse in each clan, 
is concentrated to become kingship, at first regional, then 
extended (vide supra, pp. 77 f.). 

The king’s domain, at first local, expanded, and absorbed 
the whole Nile Valley. One great fact shows that the king’s 
mission was to watch over and further agriculture by assist- 
ing natural and supernatural laws regulating tillage of the 
fields. This new fact is the appearance of the Calendar— 
that is, of a method of measuring time and fixing the date 
for the various agricultural operations. The first Egyptians 
counted by lunar months, since the word month is expressed 
ideographically by the sign moon, but they did not succeed 
by that means in dividing time in strict harmony with the 
regular recurrence of the seasons and observations of the 
sun’s course. To obtain such agreement they tried to get as 
close to the solar year as possible. Taking twelve months of 
thirty days as a basis, they supplemented them by five inter- 
calary days (epagomenz), and thus created a calendar year 
of 8365 days, within a quarter of a day of the true solar year 
(3654 days). The most salient feature of this first of known 
calendars is its adaptation to agricultural works. In it the 
twelve months were divided into three seasons respectively, 
named the inundation (akhet), the sowing (perit), and the 
harvest (shemu). The first day of the year was fixed at 
July 19 (Julian=June 15, Gregorian), when two extra- 
ordinary events greeted the eyes of tillers—the beginning of 
the Nile flood and the appearance in the heavens at the hour 


1 Maspero, XX, vol. I, chap. ii; Meyer, XXII, §§ 178, 193. 


134 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


of sunrise of the star Sothis (Sirius). This “‘ heliacal rising ”’ 
of Sothis marked for them the starting-point of an astro- 
nomical era which we call the Sothic cycle. As a result of 
the discrepancy of a quarter of a day subsisting between the 
solar year (8654 days) and the calendar year (865 days), the 
coincidence between the sunrise and appearance of Sothis 
only really existed once in every 1,460 solar or 1,461 civil 
years. 

It is obvious that this Egyptian calendar could only have 
been inaugurated in a year in which the first day of the 
year actually fell on the day of the heliacal rising of Sothis— 
July 19 (Julian). In the course of Egyptian history that 
happened in 4241, 2781, and 1821 B.c. and a.p. 140. Now, 
even under the IVth Dynasty inscriptions show that the 
calendar and the supplementary days were in current use. 
The introduction of the calendar cannot therefore be later 
than 4241 B.c. ‘* That is the oldest certain date in the 
world’s history.’’* On the other hand, our astronomers have 
calculated that it is precisely in the latitude of Memphis that 
Sothis would rise at dawn on July 19, 4241. The calendar, 
therefore, was adapted for Lower Egypt. It is a product of 
the scientific culture of the Delta, which was imposed upon 
the upper valley. This is one more proof of the very ancient 
preponderance of Lower Egypt which has left its lasting 
mark on dynastic traditions. Moreover, the date provides 
an approximate criterion for fixing the supremacy of the 
North; it must have included the year 4241 B.c. 


The following period, according to the traditions con- 
tained in the Turin Papyrus, was the epoch of the kings 
called Followers of the god (falcon) Horus (Shemsu-Hor). 
The later texts describe these Shemsu-Hor as warriors armed 
with arrows, javelins, and boomerangs, who marched into 
battle bearing blazoned on their shields not two or three of 
the deified fetishes of the earliest times, but one alone of 
these gods—the falcon Horus (Fig. 8). That is a new step 
toward centralization ; the god Horus imposes his cult on all 
Egypt. On the other hand, the king henceforth passes for 
the living incarnation of this god Horus. He is the falcon 
Horus himself on earth, and he takes it as a name: the 


1 Meyer, XXII, § 197. 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE = 185 


falcon symbol will always precede the king’s personal name 
from this epoch (Fig. 8). There we have a decisive moment 
in the history of kingship: the chief-sorcerer of former days, 
becoming step by step priest-king, now rises to the rank of 
god-king (cf. Davy, pp. 6, 80, and 107 above). 

We lack precise information to enable us to define more 
exactly this decisive event in the evolution of social life in 
Egypt. We only know that if the followers of Horus occu- 
pied the whole land, they at least remained always divided 
among two kingdoms, that of Nekheb, which now boasted a 
temple of the falcon god Horus in the town of Nekhen 
(Hierakonpolis), and that of Buto. The dualism springing 
from the contrast between the narrow valley and the spacious 
Delta persists, and it will always persist, even at the time, 
now near at hand, of the official unity of Egypt. Which 
Horus was this who became a dynastic god? Was it the 
Falcon of Upper Egypt, Horus the Great (of Edfu), who 
personifies the winged solar disc in heaven, or Horus the 
Less, son of Osiris and Isis, the god of Lower Egypt, wor- 
shipped at Buto? No text settles that question ; the accounts 
of the wars waged by the followers of Horus, engraved on 
the walls of the Temple of Edfu, are of late date. They 
record, in the guise of mythical episodes in the strife between 
Osiris and Seth, events which may have been historical, but 
are rendered unrecognizable by theological speculations. 

Whatever be their origin, the Shemsu-Hor kings retained 
the royal insignia already borne by their predecessors. But 
in addition to the red cap and the white mitre, they hold in 
their hands a shepherd’s staff, bent over at the top to form a 
crook, and an ox-herd’s whip. These will become the royal 
sceptre and the magic whip (Fig. 4). They gird about their 
loins a loincloth of fine linen hitched up by an animal’s tail, 
the trophy of the chase, recalling that they were once chiefs 
of nomad hunters. The royal garb is already finally created 
in the ritual types which it will retain till the Roman period. 

Each of the two kingdoms sought to annex the other; it 
was the South which triumphed. In the shrine of Horus 
at Hierakonpolis the first historical inscribed monuments— 
slate palettes and mace-heads of white stone—commemorate 
the victories of the South over the North. On them are 
disclosed to our gaze two crowned chiefs—the first kings 


136 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


whose lineaments are known to us in the history of Egypt, 
perhaps of the world. One, called the ‘‘ Scorpion,’’ wears 
only the white mitre of the South; he proclaims his triumph 





Figs}. 


King Scorpion, wearing white crown of the South, is wielding the mattock. 
The vanquished (rekhitu birds and people of the Bow) are hanged below 
the emblems of the victorious clans (the mountain, greyhound, thunder- 
bolt, and falcon). 


over the Egyptian people (Rekhitu), and the strangers called 
the ‘* Bows.’ His name is found as far away as the necro- 
polis of Tura, north of Memphis. He must, therefore, have 
conquered Lower Egypt, at least partially and temporarily, 
but he does not call himself its master. The other, Narmer, 


1 Quibell, Hierakonpolis, Pl. XXVI, here Fig, 5, 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE = 1387 


boasts of having massacred 6,000 inhabitants of the Delta, 
especially of the Buto district ; he carried off 12,000 prisoners 
and beat the Libyans. So he is depicted on the palette 
commemorating these conquests wearing the white crown of 
the South upright and the red crown of the North reversed. 
Cylinders bearing his name have been found in the Delta.’ 
The unity of Egypt has, then, been realized officially at least 
for a time by Narmer. The clans dispersed into distinct 
nomes, the separate kingdoms of Upper and Lower Egypt 
are succeeded by the unitary monarchy championed by the 
god Horus, to the profit of the kings of the South. 


IV 
THE THINITE MonarcHy 


It remained to convert the accomplished fact into a 
dynastic right and to create a national tradition. That was 
the work of the Ist Dynasty, of which Menes was the founder 
at Thinis about 3315 B.c. 

The detailed account of these events is reserved for our 
book in this series on Egyptian civilization ; but it is desirable 
here to outline the salient features of the political and social 
evolution achieved by the unification of Egypt. 

Beginning with the Ist Dynasty, the documentation 
assumes a historical character. The kings’ tombs have been 
discovered at Negadah,”? near Thebes, and at Abydos, the 
necropolis of the city of Thinis in Middle Egypt, which was 
the first capital. They contain stele bearing the kings’ 
names, and palettes dated by the kings’ inscriptions men- 
tioning events of political, religious, and military life. From 
this epoch there is a temple at Hierakonpolis with a gold 
image of the god Horus and stone statues of the kingly 
donors.? The furniture of the tombs and of the temple attests 
the existence of a school of working hard stone (for vases, 
the royal vessel) and metal, already in complete mastery 
over its material. Trade in copper, ivory, and amber had 
been established with foreign lands. Through wealth, art 
developed magnificently in all branches—architecture, en- 

1 Quibell, Hierakonpolis, Pl, XXIX, here Figs. 6-7. 


2 J. de Morgan, XXXII. 
8 Quibell, Wierakonpolis, Pls. XLI-XLII. 


138 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 





FG. 6.—SLATE PALETTE OF NARMER (OBVERSE), 


Narmer (whose name is inscribed in the rectangular cartouche), wearing 
the white crown of the South, is knocking on the head an Egyptian of 
the Delta. The falcon Horus is leading to him 6,000 prisoners (each 
stem of the reed stands for 1,000) 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE 



















, viey 
— NAIA, 


2 


ne RRR He = % | 
rN SS Se 


os 





Fic. 7.—SLAaTE PALETTE OF NARMER (REVERSE). 


139 


Narmer, wearing the red crown of the North, preceded by four clan ensigns, 
is on his way to a feast where captives are being butchered. Below, a 
hollow to receive the paint framed by the necks of two monsters of 
Asiatic type. At the bottom the bull-king is destroying a hostile fort 


and trampling on a vanquished foeman. 


140 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


graving, sculpture, and pottery. The king was surrounded 
by a court of officials, subordinates, and clients. These, too, 
have left us their monuments, modest indeed, but instructive 
for the light they throw on the state of society. Henceforth 
Egypt possesses a king, a capital, a religion, and a govern- 
mental machine, together with the agricultural, industrial, 
and commercial resources of a great people; in a word, a 
manner of life which denotes a developed society. 

Yet at the accession of the Ist Dynasty the brain of 
the Egyptians had only recently evolved its theories of the 
absolute power of the kings and invented writing to express 
them. Ideas and words still possess a quite fresh vigour, and 
the pictographic symbols a magic power of expression. We 
must interpret them in their full sense if we try to analyse 
their terms. 

The official titles chosen by Menes and his successors give 
voice to the conception of a king then entertained. The first 
is the name of the falcon Horus, the god of the Shemsu-Hor; 
that means that the king is the falcon incarnate. In the 
classical period the texts dilate with enthusiasm on this 
identity of nature between the king and the falcon-god. A 
royal prince is called as a baby ‘‘ the falcon in his nest.”’ 
When he ascends the throne he is ‘‘ the falcon on his palace.” 
If the king die he is the ‘*‘ falcon winging his way to heaven ”’ 
to return to the bosom of the god whence he is sprung.! In 
truth this falcon is no longer the totemic animal, father of 
the isolated clan of the Falcons; it is the national god of the 
Egypt which the Shemsu-Hor have unified. By virtue of 
this the king identifies himself with it and makes the Falcon 
the symbol of his authority and his first official title. But 
there is nothing abstract about this symbol; it conserves all 
its original realism. And so the falcon appears borne upon 
a shield going before the king in the pictures of royal victories 
and feasts. He fights for the kings, seizes his foes, and 
brings them captive to him. To write the name of King Aha 
(Menes) in ideographic signs—two arms holding targe and 
javelin—the sculptors of Negadah depict the javelin and 
targe as clutched in the talons of the falcon (Fig. 8). 

However, there were other clans among the Shemsu-Hor 
with other fetishes to protect them. One of the predecessors 


1 XXIX, 160. 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE 141 


of Menes revered a scorpion as patron. The insect not only 
gave his name to this King Scorpion, but entered the battle- 
field as his champion and destroyed the enemies’ towns with 
a mattock. Another of his predecessors, Narmer, took as 
his name and represented on earth the fish Nar; it, too, 





Fic. 9.—THE NAME OF NARMER COME TO LIFE, 


comes to life to brandish a mace with both hands over the 
head of a defeated Asiatic (Fig. 9). Menes and his successors 
have absorbed all these clans and their chiefs, totems, 
gods, and all other appurtenances.’ That result was not 
achieved without conflicts and reciprocal concessions. The 
totem gods of each of the old kingdoms of Nekheb and Buto 
won the privilege of being chosen after the falcon as official 
names of the king. So the lily or rose of the South, the bee 


1 Cf. Davy above, pp. 5-6 and 99. 


142 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


of the North, the vulture of Nekheb, and the ureus of Buto 
will for ever denote the sovereigns of North and South, the 
masters of the two crowns. So Pharaoh bought his triumph 
by adopting, side by side with the Falcon, four of the old 
rival totems; in return they lent him their material and 
moral support. The patrons of the old capitals infused their 
life and authority into the veins of the king of unified Egypt. 
The same fate awaited other emblems of clans or regional 
groups—the bull, the man-headed sphinx, the crocodile, the 
lotus of Thebes, and the papyrus of the Delta. They seem 
once to have been the totems of clans conquered by the 
unifiers of the Egyptian land, and their memory was pre- 
served in the royal inscriptions. Look at the epithets con- 
ceded to Seti I about 1400 B.c. : ** Divine falcon with mottled 
feathers he sweeps through the sky like the majesty of Ra; 
jackal swift in pursuit he travels round this earth in an hour; 
mesmeric lion he springs over the unknown roads of foreign 
lands; mighty bull with sharp horns he tramples on the 
Asiatics and crushes the Hittites.’’? 

If we restore to these ceremonial titles the full sense which 
they certainly had at the beginning, we shall understand the 
tie which unites Pharaoh? to the old clan chief. The latter 
already was, by virtue of his practical experience, the re- 
spected councillor and the most dreaded man of the clan, the 
magician, then the priest of the fetish which had become a 
god. Pharaoh, the heir of his prestige, has climbed to the 
topmost stair; he is the god incarnate upon earth. With 
this moral authority enjoyed by the king, material power 
was combined—at first the power which physical strength in 
battle secures, then that which the riches gained by conquests 
or the play of custom bestows (Davy, above, Chap. VI). It 
is certain that the Thinite kings possessed great resources in 
lands and men. They created a royal domain, the pick of 
the land of the conquered clans, and peopled it with their 
innumerable prisoners of war. The treasures accumulated 
in their tombs, the mention of many officials in charge of 
agricultural and industrial activities (see our next book), 
show that the king was rich in land and slaves. He will 

1 XXIX, 165 /. 


* PHARAOH means “‘ the great house,” an epithet analogous to ‘‘ Sublime 
Porte.” 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE 148 


tend more and more to lay claim to the whole land as the 
living representative and heir of the clan’s gods. His grasp 
will, in fact, close on the whole land at the time of the 
Memphite Empire 300 years later. 

To sum up, Menes and his immediate successors had 
devoted all their efforts to the concentration into a single 
realm of the two kingdoms of the South and North, and into 
a single person of the political and religious authority and 
the wealth previously diffused and dispersed among the 
clans, the chiefs, and the first kings. 


In the course of this account we have given the name 
totem to the protector first of the royal clan and then of 
the dynasty. The moment has come to try to define what 
primitive Egypt owes to this institution of the totemic clan, 
which in other primitive societies plays such an essential réle. 

Totem seems the word best suited to express the part 
played by the Falcon Horus in relation to the first Pharaohs. 
Where the system of totemic clans exists, the totem (animal 
or otherwise) gives its name to the territory occupied by the 
clan; in Egypt a Falcon nome existed, and later on the whole 
of Egypt was called ‘‘ the eye of Horus,’’ a mystic name 
which, being interpreted, means ‘‘the creation of the 
Falcon.’? The men of the clan and its chief bear the totem’s 
name; so do the followers of Horus and the Pharaoh Horus 
in relation to the falcon totem. The presence of the totem 
in a shrine ensures to the clan security, prosperity, and food: 
so the Falcon who guards Egypt, makes her victorious and 
nourishes her with his gifts, was worshipped at Hierakon- 
polis. In battle the totem is borne at the head of the 
warriors; so the Falcon’s ensign goes before in the martial 
scenes depicted on palettes and mace-heads. The totem 
personally takes a hand in the conflict with the clan’s 
adversaries. Have we not seen the Falcon wielding targe 
and lance and leading prisoners taken in battle with a rope? 
From time to time the totem has intercourse with a woman 
of the clan, preferably the chief’s wife; according to a tradi- 
tion, only attested from a later period, the king of Egypt 
is the offspring of the union of the queen with the tutelary 
god of the dynasty, who in this office has taken the Falcon’s 
place. It looks, then, as if the primitive Egyptian king 


144 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


stood in the same relation to the Falcon as the chief of a 
totemic clan to his totem. 

It would be interesting to know whether these relations 
between the king and the Falcon do not imply a yet older 
social state, wherein all members of the various clans had 
been themselves also in the same position in respect to their 
fetish, animal, vegetable, or other, as clansmen are in rela- 
tion to their totem. The majority of the historians, includ- 
ing Maspero and Meyer, refuse to admit the existence of 
totemic customs in Egypt. Ethnologists, such as A. van 
Gennep,’ considering that exogamy, the habitual rule of 
marriage governing totemic societies, is not to be found in 
Egypt, where, on the contrary, kings and commoners married 
their sisters and practised endogamy, renounce any sugges- 
tion of totemism in the Nile Valley, and explain the social 
role played by the guardian animals of the clans as zoolatry. 
A further argument, no less topical, is that all the indications 
of a totemic state of society refer to the king alone, and not 
to the entire people. The Shemsu-Hor were kings and not 
just men of a clan. We have no evidence that men all called 
themselves Falcons and all regarded the totem as their father, 
their protector, and their food-giver. The bond between 
them and the Falcon has been loosed; communication is no 
longer to be established save through the medium of the king. 

We need not take sides in the controversy as to the 
existence of totemism in Egypt; it is the business of the 
specialists to decide whether the arguments for or against are 
conclusive.” From the historical standpoint, however, we 
confess that the arguments against the existence of any 
totemism in Egypt do not seem decisive. It is a common 
event in the history of all peoples that in the period of their 
maturity the king alone enjoys the privileges which were 
originally the common property of a clan or people. On the 
facts stated, everything seems to be consistent with the 
possibility that the essential features of an earlier totemic 
state of society now only appear to us distorted and focussed 
in one single figure—that of the king. It is prudent to leave 
the question open and not discard the idea that the 
Egyptians had, perhaps, known the equalitarian system of 


1 L’Etat actuel du probleme totémigue (1921), pp. 194 ff. 
* XXIX, 219. 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE 145 


totemism before gerontocracy, local monarchy, and central- 
ized monarchy. In our book on Egyptian civilization we 
shall see that a trace of that totemic ideal whereby fetishes, 
chief, clansmen, and all Nature’s creations are treated with 
perfect equality as brothers seems to have been retained in 
religious customs in the notion of the Ka.' 


The analysis of the titles borne by the Pharaohs since 
Menes needs to be supplemented by a short description of 
the great events of kingly life. They are known from the 
carved palettes, from dated historical monuments of the 
kings of the Ist Dynasty, and from the royal annals of 
the Palermo Stone.” We shall gain from this study some 
insight into the duties incumbent upon the king, and we 
shall be better able to define the character of the primitive 
kingship. 

To ensure the worship of the gods, the defence of Egypt, 
and the prosperity of his people by regular cultivation of the 
soil, that was the office of the king, and he claimed to fulfil 
it by his vigilance, his intelligence, and his supernatural 
powers. The royal annals scrupulously record what the king 
did toward the attainment of this triple object and restrict 
the number of events of the reign worthy of commemoration 
to these subjects. 

The cult of the gods entailed the building of temples, the 
performance of rites, the presentation of offerings, and the 
celebration of festivals at which the king always played 
the foremost part. The Palermo Stone expressly mentions 
the years in which the king had ‘“‘ stretched the cord’ to 
measure out the area for this or that temple, it enumerates 
the birth festivals and the national feasts of the gods Anubis, 
Minu, Sokaris, and Sed, and relates the circumstances under 
which especially copious offerings had been provided for the 
altars in the temple. 

In addition to these almost daily obligations, the kings 
celebrated every two years a great national festival in honour 
of the dynastic god, the Falcon Horus. This was the feast 
of the ‘‘ Service of Horus,’’ which necessitated heavy expen- 
diture on the construction of great barques for a voyage of 

* XXIX, 199-219; cf. Davy, p. 9 supra. 


? H. Schaefer, Zin Bruchstick altegyptischer Annalen. 
10 


146 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


the god and the king upon the Nile, probably to Hierakon- 
polis, the sanctuary of Horus, and in other directions. 

What of the defence of Egypt? The kings watched over 
her by campaigns directed against the nomads of Libya, 
Nubia, and Sinai, backward starvelings who knew not yet 
the labour of civilization, but wished to taste its fruits 
cheaply by plundering the fields and towns of the valley. 
We shall see in the next chapter how the Pharaohs had 
elaborated a scheme of defence and then of expansion which 


F3G.°10. 


The Vulture goddess (Nekheb) presents King Khasekhem with the emblem 
(sma taut) of the “union of the two lands, the year of a victory over 
the men of the North ” (Hierakonpolis, Pl. XXXVIT). 


will gradually lead them from a conception of a national 
kingdom to that of an international empire. 

But human arms were far from sufficing to protect Egypt, 
her gods, and her people; the aid of magic arms must be 
invoked. On his coronation day each Pharaoh, from Menes 
to the close of Egyptian civilization, paraded in great pomp 
round a fortified wall, probably the ‘* White Wall??? which 
Menes had built at the apex of the Delta (on the site where 
Memphis was subsequently to rise). 

This ceremony of “‘the procession round the wall” 
(pkhrer ha inbu) was repeated from time to time to renew 


1 Herodotus, ii, 99; iii, 91. 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE 147 


the efficacy of the protection which the king’s presence 
afforded. On the same occasions—1t.e., on the coronation day 
and at periodical intervals—the king celebrated ‘‘ the union 
of the two lands ”’ (sma taui). In his full royal robes he sat 
on a throne or platform placed over a stake with double point 
planted in the ground (the sign sma a sort of ** thunderbolt ”’ 
fallen from the sky) ; the stake was bound round with sheaves 
of the papyrus of the Delta and the lotus or lily of the South 
symbol of tauz (the two lands).' As surely as the king was 
enthroned above the two symbolical plants bound together, 
as surely as he vigilantly went the round of the White Wall, 
so Egypt would be blessed with union, peace, and prosperity 
(Fig. 10). 

Prosperity the king must win for his people also by virtue 
of the magic privilege of command over Nature which he 
inherited from his ancestors, the sorcerers and priests. Sir 
James Frazer has shown that in most primitive societies the 
kings are credited with power to make the sun shine, the 
rain fall, and the crops germinate, and so they are called 
**the kings of the weather, of fire, of water, and of crops.”’ 
With such power Pharaoh was credited; curious traditions 
preserved throughout the whole historic period, and special 
rites going back to Menes, give us certainty of this. The 
Kgyptian wizards, according to the testimony of folk tales, 
laid claim at all epochs to stay the courses of the stars and 
of the rivers, to produce at their will night or day, rain or 
fine weather. It is beyond doubt that Pharaoh, of whom it 
was said under the XVIIIth Dynasty that he was ‘“‘ the 
master of magic spells, he to whom Thoth himself had taught 
all his secrets,’’? was esteemed still more able than any 
magician to influence Nature at his pleasure. 

King of fire Pharaoh is because he is the sun, the glorious 
course of which he imitates upon earth. On his coronation 
the king ‘‘ rises ’’? (Kha) on his throne like the sun in heaven. 
We must take these words in their full signification and 
understand that in the eyes of his Thinite subjects Menes, in 
performing his ‘‘ rising as king of the South’? (Kha nswt) 
and his ‘* rising as king of the North ’’ (Kha bity) was really 
ensuring upon earth the appearance of the sun, the great 
producer of all existence. Like the sma-taui and the pkhrer, 


AAR Sochap li. 2 Sethe, Urkunden, iv, 19-20. 


148 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


these two magic rites of “‘risings’’ were repeated periodically, 
so that their efficacy should never become exhausted.' As 
surely as the king ‘‘ rises’? every day upon his throne, the 
sun will rise every day to fertilize Nature. The king also 
controls another form of celestial fire—the thunderbolt which 
the Urzeus encircling his crown spits out and which the waz 
sceptre, sometimes twisted like the lightning in his hands, 
typifies.” Thanks to this magic weapon, and through the 
rumblings like thunder which he causes his foes to hear, the 
king terrifies those who would attack his people. 

King of the water, Pharaoh, copying Osiris, the god of 
the Nile and vegetation, personifies ‘‘ the first eddy of flood 
water *’;° he was called ‘‘ he who gives water to the earth,’ 
and even in the desert water rises to his voice so soon as he 
calls it.” At the moment when the Nile, almost dry, seems 
to be lost in the abysms of the nether-world, Pharaoh throws 
into the river the written order for the flood to begin,® and 
the inundation takes place instantly. Each year the royal 
officials examined the circumstances under which the flood 
took place and noted the height of the water in cubits and 
hand-breadths, observations which the Palermo Stone has 
preserved for us as far as the first dynasties are concerned. 

King of the harvests, Pharaoh inaugurates the great 
seasons of agricultural labour, turning the sod with a 
mattock, opening the irrigation canals with a pick, and 
cutting the first ears with a sickle. On one of the mace-heads 
from Hierakonpolis we see King Scorpion digging an irriga- 
tion runnel with his own hands.’ On the testimony of Hero- 
dotus," Menes had no higher title to glory than that of having 
protected the Delta from excessive floods by a great dyke. 
The kings placed in the forefront of their concerns the culti- 
vation of the soil, the harvests, the conservation of grain in 
solid granaries, and the multiplication of flocks and herds. 
Under the first dynasties the royal officials took the “‘ census 
of fields and cattle ’’ at regular dates, distributed the land 
for cultivation among teams of labourers, and ended by 

* XXX, chap. iii. 2 nde, Lode 
* Pyramids, ed. Sethe, § 507. 

* Gardiner, Admonitions of an Egyptian Sage, p. 55. 
° Stele of Kuban, 1, 17; vide infra, p. 383, note 1. 


6 Stele of Silsilis (Rameses II and III), XII (1873), p. 129. 
* XXIX, Pl. V; cf. our Fig. 5. A A GT 2 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE 149 


establishing such a strict and effective control that all private 
properties disappeared and the whole arable land of Egypt 
became the king’s domain.’ On the other hand, the king left 
to each family of labourers the portion of crops necessary for 
life, and in time of dearth he fed his people with the reserves 
in the granaries. In the imagination of the people the king 
possessed magic secrets so potent that the products of all 
Nature ‘‘ came forth at his voice ’’ (per-khru)? as soon as he 
uttered the master-word; so he was the great ‘* provider ”’ 
for his people; he ‘* presided over the provisions for all living 
beings”? (khenly kau ankhu nebu).° 


The counterpart to these magic powers in primitive 
societies is that in them the kings are subject to strict obliga- 
tions (taboos) and are held responsible for the harvests 
and the public health and prosperity. Was it the same in 
primitive Egypt? 

To borrow the words of the author of the Golden Bough, 
** the king’s person is regarded as the dynamic centre of the 
universe : the least slip on his part might upset the balance 
of the whole. He must therefore take great precautions; 
his whole life is minutely regulated down to the smallest 
details.”® Hence arise the interdictions against doing this 
or that, against eating such or such a dish, which are all 
designed to surround the king with a safety-zone; they are 
taboos. In this connection we may recall a tradition pre- 
served by Diodorus (i, 70). ‘* The Pharaohs’ lives were 
regulated down to the least details; they must eat only veal 
and goose and drink only a limited quantity of wine.’’? In 
fact, in temples of late date we find lists giving for each 
nome, besides the names of the gods, the temples, and the 
priests, a note of the forbidden thing, the taboo (but), which 
is most often a particular dish, the consumption of which 
was forbidden in this region. It has been alleged that these 
prohibitions were only in force at a late period and were 
applied mainly to the priest-kings of Napata; their character 
would be sacerdotal rather than royal. Now that we are 
better acquainted with primitive institutions, we do not 
hesitate to see in these taboos the survival of very ancient 


1 XXII, § 244. 2 XXX, chap. iv; XXIX, 34 /. 
* XXX, p. 231 and chaps. iv and v; cf. Davy, pp. 105 #. above. 


150 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


customs, such as the prohibition against eating the local 
totems.’ 

On the other hand, certain curious traditions justify the 
supposition that the Pharaohs were held responsible for the 
regularity of the crops and the public weal. If we may trust 
Plutarch,’ the sacred animals in which the old totems of the 
original clans may be recognized were sometimes submitted 
to terrible tests: ‘‘ When an excessive and pestilential heat 
wave overtakes the country, producing epidemics or other 
exceptional calamities, the priests select some of the sacred 
animals and in the utmost secrecy drive them to a secluded 
spot. There they first seek to terrify them by threats; if the 
misfortune continue, they cut their throats and offer them in 
sacrifice, either to punish the evil spirit or as the greatest 
expiation they can offer.’’ As the Pharaohs had taken upon 
their shoulders in the primitive society the protective func- 
tion of the sacred animals, it follows that they must share 
their responsibility. That is practically what is asserted by 
a tradition, related by Ammianus Marcellinus*® in reference 
to a similar custom among the barbarian Germans, asserts. 
‘* According to an ancient rite, the king is deposed if the 
fortune of war has fluctuated during his reign, or if the 
earth has refused an abundance of crops; so the Egyptians 
habitually treat their chiefs in similar circumstances.’’? Let 
us compare these texts: the Biblical tradition imputing to 
the Pharaohs of Joseph and Moses the blame for the seven 
years of famine and the ten plagues of Egypt;* the stele 
of King Zeser, made in the Ptolemaic epoch, on which a 
Pharaoh of the I[Ird Dynasty is represented in accordance 
with popular beliefs as searching the black books of magic 
for spells to conjure away pestilence and drought; the legends 
reported by Manetho about Kings Amenophis and Bocchoris, 
adjudged responsible for the health of the people at the 
time of an epidemic of plague—and we shall be convinced 
that the Egyptians blamed their kings for the misdeeds of 
Nature.° 

Other cases exist in which the physical and magical 
strength of kings was thought insufficient to support the 
great and important part they played in regard to their 


XXIX, 176 f. 2 De Iside et Osiride, 78. ’ XXXVIII. 
* Gen. xli; Exod. x, 27, 5 XXIX, 182 /. 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE 151 


subjects. Disease or old age might render a king impotent. 
Now, the weal of his people and Nature depends upon the 
king’s vigour. ‘* Nothing,’’ writes Sir James Frazer, ‘* will 
prevent the man-god from growing old and dying. ... The. 
danger is terrible, for if the course of Nature is dependent on 
the man-god’s life, what catastrophes will not happen when 
he die?’’' There was only one way to avert the peril, accord- 
ing to the mind of primitive peoples—‘*‘ to kill the man-god 
as soon as the first symptoms of weakness became manifest, 
and to transfer his soul into a more robust body ; for instance, 
into the body of a vigorous successor.’”? 

Hence arises the custom of the ritual murder of the aged 
sovereign. As soon as the symptoms of old age become 
apparent in a king or at a predetermined date, after a reign 
of twelve, twenty, or thirty years, the sovereign is slain at a 
solemn ceremony and replaced by a young successor. In the 
majority of cases the kings eventually succeeded in inducing 
the people to accept a mitigation of these customs by the 
substitution of human or animal victims in their place. But 
such substitutions were only tolerated if the rites gave the 
aged kings a renewal of youth and health. 

Had the first Pharaohs to bow to such customs? They 
were practised in their pristine severity in the land of Meroé 
on the Upper Nile* down to the reign of Ergamenes, the 
contemporary of Ptolemy II Philadelphos. At the present 
day tribes of the Upper Nile, such as the Shilluk, still kill 
their age-worn kings ceremonially.* The custom was there- 
fore known in the Nile regions. Now, the majority of the 
commemorative tablets dating from the age of the Thinite 
kings relate to a festival, Sed, celebrated at regular intervals 
and kept up till the Roman epoch. The name of this festival 
is obscure, the chief episodes (which we will describe in our 
next volume) are unintelligible, unless it be admitted that 
they refer to a transformation of the living king into an 
Osiris-god, dead and reanimated. The king ‘‘ imitates ’’ the 
death of Osiris, and as surely as this god is reborn in virtue 
of magic rites, so surely does the king ‘‘ renew his births ”’ 
(wham mestu) and receive from the gods “‘ life for thousands 
of years.’’ This opinion, which I have defended, is still hotly 


1 The Golden Bough, The Magic Art, p. 9. 2 XXIX, 184 /. 
8 Diodorus, III, 6; Strabo, XVIII, 2, 3. 4 XXIX, 185. 


152 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


debated. Yet Edward Meyer agrees that “ after this festival 
the king, as it were, began a second reign; at the beginning 
kingship seems only to have been given for a limited 
time. . . . The Greek authors inform us that this limitation 
existed also in the case of the bull Apis whom the priests had 
to slay when he had passed the twenty-fifth year after his 
enthronement.’’ Sir Flinders Petrie! unreservedly admits the 
analogy between the Sed festival and the ritual murder of 
the king. Whatever obscurities shroud the subject, it seems 
to be indisputable that this festival at which the king renews 
life and kingship has been the device invented to avoid the 
obligation of accepting death or deposition after a reign of 
limited duration. : 

Even after death the king’s office towards his people is 
not over; perhaps he becomes even more important than 
during his life on earth. The king who is a god could not die; 
the Pyramid texts of the VIth Dynasty (about 2500 B.c.), 
which are inspired by very ancient traditions, say that the 
‘* dying of the king ”’ is not “‘ dying a whole death.”? Conse- 
quently, after his passing, the king enters upon a super- 
natural life in which he is mediator between the dead men 
and the gods; he remains the protector, the intercessor, and 
the magician who saves the departed as he has saved the 
living. Hence the people’s eagerness and alacrity in building 
splendid tombs to protect the royal body from any hurt and 
to secure him fitting and eternal means of subsistence. The 
royal tombs of Negadah and Abydos would alone suffice to 
prove what immense importance the Egyptians under the 
Ist Dynasty already attached to the defunct king’s advocacy 
among the gods. But what are we to say of the colossal 
pyramids of Gizeh, built about 2850 B.c., 500 years after 
Menes? Such enterprises, which absorbed all the energy and 
wealth of a country to do honour to the mortal remains of a 
Pharaoh, prove that the people expected of the dead king the 
same miracles as from the living king: after guiding and 
protecting men on earth, Pharaoh became their guide in the 
life beyond the grave, and gave them the hope that after his 
example they, too, might escape final death. If the tomb of 
a Menes or a Kheops attain the dimensions of a fortress, it is 
because it guards the body of him who, alive or dead, concen- 
trates in himself the whole destiny of humanity. 


* Researches in Sinat, and Memphis, III. 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE = 1538 


Such in its main outlines was the image of kingship in 
the earliest times to which history at present allows us to 
penetrate. The king is not only ‘‘ a happy warrior,”’ a brave 
protector of his people on the battlefield, and amasser of 
lands who has become the richest chief in the land. He 
assumes also the figure of a magician who founds his 
authority on a series of operations of imitative magic. 
Having assimilated and digested the persons and powers 
of gods and fetishes, the revered guardians of clans and 
kingdoms, he takes possession of the two lands, he rises as 
the sun, he gives men water and harvests, he ensures their 








BAGe tt. 


An episode from the Sed festival of King Narmer (Hierakonpoilis, 
Pie Vi, o.); 


security by his strength, intelligence, and courage, of course, 
but also by the moral ascendancy conferred upon him in the 
eyes of his people by the constant repetition of master-rites 
invented for the benefit of the gods, of which he alone holds 
the secrets (seshtau). His health, so vital for his country’s 
weal, is maintained by the magic rejuvenation effected by 
the Sed festivals, which convert him into an ever-living 
Osiris. Even after his decease he ‘‘ renews his births,’’ he 
reigns as Osiris or Ra in the other world, where he has the 
power to conduct men into the presence of the gods by virtue 
of what is called *‘ the secret magic of the Court” (heka 
seshta n khen).! Thus was created for Menes and all the 
Pharaohs a dynastic right founded upon their perfect identity 
with the gods, the first kings of mortals, confirmed by tradi- 
tion and sustained by the magic rites which gave the king the 


1 Sethe, Urkunden, I, 48. 


154 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


garb, the crown, the weapons, the physical mien, and all the 
material and moral powers of the gods. 

The dynastic right thus formed became for the Egyptians 
a national tradition which was perpetuated for thousands of 
years down to the Christian era. How is such persistence to 
be explained? The Egyptians, who had made the first known 
experiment in a social organization, lived in a land where, 
without a universally accepted discipline to which all 
bowed, and without a common goodwill on the part of all 
its inhabitants, the marvellous resources of the soil and the 
river were unusable. What would become of the fellah in 
the Delta if the people of Upper Egypt kept back the Nile 
waters in case of drought, or let it flow through too quickly 
in case of a great flood? How could dykes, canals, and 
reservoirs be built and maintained if men did not combine 
their efforts? How could the full yield of the natural re- 
sources be obtained if tribal rivalries hindered the exacting 
tillage of the fields? What would be the use of carefully 
cultivating wheat, barley, and dates, and breeding stock by 
thousands, what the use of creating a state of comfort and 
affluence by handicrafts and forges if the nomads of the 
desert descended upon the valley in periodical raids? After 
experiencing such disillusionments and enduring these 
scourges for thousands of years, the Egyptian peasants had 
learnt the necessity of a strong and unified organization, the 
head of which must have the authority necessary to enable 
him to take the direction of the tasks of agriculture and 
industry, to maintain an equal justice for all, and to afford 
security against neighbours and plunderers. All that had 
they demanded from their fetishes; as soon as they had been 
convinced that these local gods were based upon one single 
type living amongst them upon earth—the Pharaoh—they 
adopted this guide and protector with an unquestioning 
faith for centuries. 

The adaptation of barbarous custom to a political State, 
the extension of the king’s responsibilities, and the enlarge- 
ment of his power over men and lands, that was the achieve- 
ment of the Pharaohs of the Thinite dynasties. Without 
breaking with the old traditions, they made them innocuous 
and transmitted them with added rights to their successors, 
thus preserving what might help to retain for them the super- 
stitious respect of the populace. 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE = 155 


Vv 
THe HyrorHesis oF AN ASIATIC INVASION OF EGYPT 


Is the development of civilization in Egypt and the 
creation of the first State explicable in terms of the natural 
gifts and pertinacious labour of the first Egyptians alone? 
Or must we admit that a new race entered Egypt at that 
moment and gave its people the decisive impulse along the 
path of progress? 

The hypothesis of an Asiatic invasion preoccupied deeply 
the minds of the archeologists who discovered and catalogued 
the tombs of Abydos and Negadah. According to them, the 
** Followers of Horus ’’ were a conquering race who easily 
triumphed over the neolithic Egyptians because they were 
acquainted with metallurgy and were armed with more 
perfect weapons.’ After conquering the Nile Valley they 
taught the natives the use of gold, copper, and bronze, the 
art of building in brick and stone, and introduced writing, 
that vehicle of all progress and organization. Thanks to 
them, Egypt advanced from a clan government to a central- 
ized State. In a word, they were, on this view, the dynastic 
race. But whence did they come? Arguments have been 
adduced in favour of Chaldea as the home of the new- 
comers—the use of brick, of the cylinder for stamping names 
on the clay, the similarity of certain weapons, such as the 
stone mace-head, certain types of building with crenellated 
walls (Negadah and Tello), and, finally, the presence on the 
ivory handle of a flint knife, and on some prehistoric palettes, 
of persons in long woollen robes of Sumerian type, and of 
animals—rampant lions, coiled snakes, and long-necked 
monsters (Fig. 7)—heraldically opposed, according to a very 
ancient Asiatic style.” The Egyptian civilization of the first 
dynasties would, then, be the result of a blending of two 
stocks—the one African, to whom are due the weapons, 
pottery, and palettes, older than the period of Negadah, the 
other of Asiatic origin, responsible for the Thinite monu- 
ments.° But what route did the invasion follow? Here 
great stress is laid on religious traditions, according to which 
the land of Punt on the southern shore of the Red Sea is said 

' de Morgan, XXXI, pp. 88, 101, 102, 114. 


2 Langdon, XIII, vol. vii (1921). 
® See the summary of this thesis in XXVII, 188 /. 


156 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


to have furnished the Egyptians with their national gods, 
such as Horus and Hathor. The Followers of Horus came, 
then, from Asia through Yemen and Punt along the route 
from Qoseir to Koptos;' arrived at the central district, 
Hierakonpolis (Abydos), they built there the great Thinite 
tombs, and thence conquered the rest of the valley. 

This theory of an Asiatic invasion as the inspiration of 
the ‘‘historic’’ civilization in Egypt no longer satisfies 
Egyptologists. Their main objection may be summed up 
thus: to bring into a country a higher culture the invaders 
must themselves have possessed a superior organization; a 
centre of more advanced culture must have been manifest for 
centuries, and that within striking distance. Now, neither 
in the neighbourhood of Egypt nor anywhere else had an 
Oriental people reached an equal degree of civilization about 
the middle of the fourth millenium. The Sumerians, who 
naturally occur to one’s mind, appear abruptly in Southern 
Mesopotamia in the course of the fourth millenium. Their 
annals allow us to trace their history still further back; 
but we know nothing about their evolution from primitive 
savagery. At the moment when we first catch sight of them 
they have left the Stone Age behind; they know copper, 
pottery, and brick architecture; they have an ideographic 
script and rudimentary institutions. But neither their lan- 
guage nor their script exhibits the faintest relationship to 
that of Egypt; their industry is otherwise inferior in tech- 
nique, diversity, and, above all, artistic feeling. Have they 
been in contact with Egypt? There is no reason to deny it. 
The resemblances noted between pottery, weapons, buildings, 
and decorative motives may bear witness to commercial inter- 
course by land or sea. That would suffice to explain the 
use of copper implements and vases, similarly ornamented 
pottery, cylinders to mark names, and brick buildings with 
crenellated walls common to Elam, Chaldea, and Egypt.? 
But an invasion of Egypt by Sumerians by way of Arabia or 
the Red Sea is an uncalled-for and hazardous speculation. 
As to the traditions about the origins of the Egyptian gods, 
such as Horus and Hathor, they only concern the zone of 
the land of Punt, which probably did not extend beyond the 
African coast of the Red Sea. To sum up, the theory that 


1 Hall, XIX, p. 94. * XXXII, §§ 200, 229; cf. pp. 209 f. infra. 


THE ORIGINS OF SOCIAL LIFE = 157 


the dynastic civilization of Egypt is of Asiatic origin comes 
to shipwreck on one vital fact ; up to the present Egypt seems 
to have had the priority over all other countries in the 
domain of culture and invention. 


In this discussion that lacks decisive arguments the 
examination of the corpses found in the Thinite cemeteries, 
and the comparison of the languages spoken in Egypt and 
Western Asia, may furnish an important contribution. 

As to race, the researches of specialists into the Thinite 





Fic. 12.—EGyYPTIAN OF THE NORTH. Fic. 18.—EGYPTIAN OF THE SOUTH 
(Louvre Palette.) IVORY FROM HIERAKONPOLIS. 


(Cf. de Morgan, XXXI, Fig. 43.) 


skulls show that the Egyptian population was more mixed 
than at the chalcolithic epoch. 

Three well-marked types are distinguishable. First, a 
southern type with small head and delicate features, akin to 
the Gallas of Somaliland and the inhabitants of Southern 
Arabia; second, a Semito-Libyan type in the north, with 
large head and hooked nose, figured on the palette on which 
Narmer exterminates ‘‘ the people of the north’’; third, 
another northern type, brachycephalic with straight short 
nose, of which the statues of the Memphite epoch a few 
centuries later will give perfect specimens among the high 
officials and courtiers; this type is Mediterranean or Euro- 


158 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


pean in appearance. So the population of dynastic Egypt 
included African, Semitic, and Mediterranean elements.! 

Philology gives a similar response. If the embodiment of 
language, the pictographic script, be consulted, nothing 
Asiatic is found there; the animals, plants, and objects which 
form the ideographic or phonetic signs are specifically Nilotic. 
But from the grammatical standpoint the language offers a 
synthesis of composite elements. Fundamental analogies 
with the Semitic languages are noticeable—personal pro- 
nouns, system of conjugation, feminine endings in t and in 
ut (plural), duals in 7, and a preponderance of consonants to 
form biliteral or triliteral roots. On the other hand, Maxence 
de Rochemonteix and Rheinisch’ have discovered elements 
borrowed from Berber or Negro dialects. The Egyptian 
language would therefore contain something African from 
the north, something African from the south, and, above all, 
something Semitic. 

So stands the question provisionally: the dynastic race 
of Egypt remains Mediterranean even while embodying 
African elements; it contains Semitic elements without 
being a colony of Asia. In the crucible of the Nile Valley 
diverse races have been fused; from it arises a people homo- 
geneous like their fatherland, disciplined by religion, indus- 
trious and methodical by their environment, a people who by 
enforced solidarity had had to create a morality and a collec- 
tive conscience, and who emerge from barbarism with a 
radiance of faith. There we see human intelligence, which 
rises for the first time, as far as our present knowledge goes, 
on one region of our world and brings the dawn of a civiliza- 
tion into the surrounding darkness. 

* Elliot-Smith, The Ancient Egyptians. See a good summary by Hall in 


XIX, pp. 85-97. 
* Cf. Ad. Erman, £gyptische Grammatik (2nd ed.), §§ 1-4. 


CHAPTER II 


THE EGYPTIAN KINGDOM AND ITS NEIGHBOURS 
UNDER THE OLD EMPIRE 


We must now follow the development of this first State in 
relation to the human environment it found around it in the 
East Mediterranean world of the third millenium B.c. We 
shall sketch in their main outlines the actions and reactions 
which took place between the Egyptians and other Orientals. 
They are defined at first by the Egyptian documents alone, 
and then revealed by Chaldean, Hittite, Assyrian, Creto- 
ZEgean, and Palestinian monuments as and when such 
become available. We shall try to depict the patient efforts 
of various human groups to form themselves in turn into 
States, and the wider ambition of the more gifted to create 
an Empire which should organize the Oriental world into a 
single society. These efforts and ambitions were often frus- 
trated, either by incapacity or organic weakness, or by the 
intrusion of human hordes still uncivilized in quest of better 
lands, eager to enjoy this Oriental civilization which, like a 
lighthouse in the night of barbarism, attracted to it all the 
nomads. In fact, each of the great peoples of the Ancient 
East—Egyptians, Chaldeans, Assyrians, Medes and Persians 
—_spent themselves on this task. The spasmodic attempts at 
empire foundered beneath the periodic onslaughts and suc- 
cessive waves of migrating peoples until Hellenic culture and 
the peace of Rome were imposed, for a few centuries, on the 
whole of the Mediterranean world. 


I 
Tur ALLEGED ISOLATION OF EGYPT 


In reference to Egypt’s relations with neighbouring 
peoples, it is well to examine at the start an opinion often 
expressed by ancient and modern historians. According to 
them, Egypt owed the singularity of its customs, religion, 
art, and script to the fact that it developed in this Nile Valley 

159 


160 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


as if in a closed vessel shut off from the rest of humanity 
by seas, deserts, and cataracts. Let us concede that such 
defences favoured Egypt’s development by protecting her 
soil from invasions. The ways of access, on all sides limited 
and narrow, were ill-adapted for migrations of peoples and 
armies. Forced to traverse wide arid stretches, invaders ran 
the risk of being without water or provisions for weary days, 
or, if they came by the Mediterranean, they were exposed 
to the danger of being cut off from their base after a naval 
defeat : such was to be the fate on more than one occasion of 
the Peoples of the Sea and the Assyrians, not to mention 
modern invaders. Nevertheless, the isolation of Egypt is 
only apparent; as the field of historical observation is 
widened we discover that the “singularity ’’ of the Egyp- 
tians means rather ‘‘ antiquity.”’ In our subsequent book 
we shall show that various surprising customs among the 
Egyptians find their equivalent in other primitive societies, 
and are only survivals of a very ancient state of society of 
which Egypt alone among historical peoples has kept the 
recollection. The civilization of Egypt could not be pre- 
sented as an abnormal and exceptional type; the laws of 
ordinary human development force us to admit very ancient 
and permanent relations between her and her neighbours. 
Consider first the geographical situation. Every navigable 
river is a ‘‘moving road.’? Now, the Nile, between two 
immense tablelands where from century to century the sands 
have sucked up the waters and made life precarious for men, 
beasts, and plants, offers a waterway abundantly supplied 
with provisions. At one end it plunges into the heart of the 
African continent, at the other it opens out to the Mediter- 
ranean, the route to the isles, Asia Minor, and an illimitable 
hinterland. Moreover, Egypt almost borders on another 
much-frequented sea—the Red Sea; the latter, more hos- 
pitable than the desert, unites rather than divides Yemen 
and Abyssinia, where civilization developed very early. 
Finally, the Isthmus of Suez, which recent researches show 
to have been from the remotest ages much what it is to-day, 
forms a bridge between the Delta and Syria. The geo- 
graphical situation of Egypt is such that, although she is an 
oasis encircled with a girdle of sand, she forms the only 
convenient corridor for travelling from the centres of civiliza- 


EGYPTIAN KINGDOM 161 


tion in the Ancient World to the heart of Black Africa; at 
the same time she unites the coast of North Africa, the 
Mediterranean Little Africa, to Arabia and Asia Minor. 

And so the historical race of Egypt is the product of 
heterogeneous ingredients; this country has always kept a 
mixed population in which we have above distinguished 
Sudanese, Libyan, Semitic, and Mediterranean elements. 

If we now examine the economic conditions imposed on 
the Egyptians by Nature, they confirm the necessity of 
borrowing from neighbouring lands, which their geographical 
conditions already implied. The valley offered its first occu- 
pants a luxuriant flora, but one the poverty of which in 
edible varieties surprises naturalists. Before enrichment 
through agriculture, this flora offered only a very small 
number of species growing wild; as vegetable food the first 
occupants had only some fruits (chiefly the dum palm), the 
papyrus, and lotus, the roots and stalks of which they ate, 
and, finally, some herbs. The three cereals (barley, millet, 
and wheat), which subsequently made Egypt the world’s 
granary, Candolle and Schweinfurth tell us, grow wild in 
North Palestine, Western Persia, and the Mediterranean 
Basin.’ The conclusion is that the primitive Egyptians 
probably cultivated and improved some of their indigenous 
plant species in their narrow gardens; but agriculture on a 
larger scale, using cereals, would be an importation from 
abroad.” 

The indigenous Egyptian fauna was, on the other hand, 
rich in animals, but these had the disadvantage of being 
dangerous or useless to man; crocodiles, hippopotami, 
snakes, scorpions, panthers, lions, foxes, jackals, elephants, 
giraffes, and birds of prey such as falcons and vultures 
were obstacles to the labours of civilized men, and unsuitable 
for domestication. Two species among the quadrupeds might 
be suitable for breeding—the ass, a native of the Nubian 
plateau, which was the Egyptian’s beast of burden par 


1 Beer and wheaten starch bear similar names in Egyptian and Baby- 
lonian, XXII, §§ 200, 229; cf. Maspero, XX, vol. I, 27. 

2 Breasted disputes this view. He supposes that the tablelands of num- 
mulitic limestone enclosing the Nile valley may once have lent themselves 
to the germination of wild wheat just as well as the Palestinian plateaux 
of a similar formation: XXV (Oct., 1919), p. 316. 


11 


162 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


excellence, and the long-horned ox, which had existed from 
an early age in Nubia.’ The antelope was just tamed, and 
in the farmyards we early meet the pigeon, the goose, and 
the crane. But from Asia, according to most zoologists, 





Fic. 14.—EGypTIANS OF THE NORTH REPELLING A NAVAL RAID 
(PRE-DyNASTIC EPocH). 


(After G. Bénédite, Ze Couteau de Gebel-el-Aragq.) 


came goats and pigs, perhaps even sheep, as articles of trade 
or barter between nomads and agriculturists, not to mention 
rarer species such as deer. The Nile’s waters offered a large 
variety of fishes, not, however, very tasty, and later on often 
the object of taboos; its reedy banks sheltered quails, lap- 
wings, swallows, and a multitude of birds, especially web- 
footed species ; but hunting and fishing among the wild beasts 


* In the Nile Valley a fragment of a skull of Bos primigenius has been 
discovered in the pleistocene deposits of the Fayum.—/did., p. 418. 


EGYPTIAN KINGDOM 163 


and monsters lurking in the Nile jungle were perilous exer- 
cises IN comparison with beats or stalking in the desert, 
sports so charmingly pictured at a later date on the walls of 
Egyptian tombs. 

In mineral wealth underground Egypt was once more 
lacking. She was, indeed, well provided all along the valley 
with silt, plastic clay, fine or coarse limestone and compact 
sandstone, and in places with igneous rocks—basalts, 
granites, and serpentines. But she had neither copper, iron, 
gold, silver, nor tin. The Egyptians procured gold from 
sands or auriferous minerals in the rivers and mountains of 
Nubia and Ethiopia, where it was plentiful.t Copper they 
found in Sinai, but in exiguous quantities,” and in the form 
of carbonates difficult to smelt; they had to turn chiefly to 
Cyprus for copper, to Anatolia for iron (which was little 
used by them at any epoch), and to unknown intermediaries 
for tin and silver. 

In the same way forests are wanting in Egypt; even in 
Nubia they were sparse. At a later date ebony was imported 
from the Upper Nile, but the common essences had to be 
brought from Asia Minor, especially Lebanon,’ where conifers 
abound. The ‘‘ sacred trees,’’ the sycamore and persea, are 
natives of Yemen, as are the myrrh and _ incense-trees. 
The typical or indigenous Egyptian timbers, date palms, 
tamarisks, and acacias, furnished a hard, knotted, brittle, or 
spongy wood inconvenient to work; neither building material 
nor artistic furniture nor seaworthy vessels could be made 
from them. 

Now, we have seen the population of Egypt in post- 
neolithic days was acquainted with stock-breeding, agri- 
culture, navigation, and the use, if not the extraction, of 
metals; by the time of the Thinite dynasties they had 
brought stone and copper-working, pottery, agricultural and 
industrial production, and architecture to a high level of 
perfection. In view of Egypt’s poverty in natural resources 
in respect of flora, fauna, ore, and forests, this remarkable 


+ Schweinfurth, I, vol. IV, 268. 

* de Morgan, XXXI, p. 114, perhaps exaggerates the poverty of the 
copper mines in Sinai. 

8 In periods of revolution when commercial life was disturbed, one of the 
causes of misery in Egypt was the impossibility of importing timber from 
Lebanon; cf. Gardiner, Admonitions, p. 32. 


164 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


development of agriculture, stock-breeding, and industry 
presupposes the introduction of animal and vegetable species 
and minerals from the producing countries—Asia Minor, 
Palestine, Arabia, and Abyssinia. 

This hypothesis is supported by the researches of an 
eminent naturalist and ethnologist, Georg Schweinfurth. For 
many years he has studied on the spot the plants, animals, 
and peoples of Arabia and Egypt. In what Schweinfurth 
calls the *‘ ancient triangle of civilization ’’ (Kultur dreiecke) 
—Babylonia, Yemen, Egypt—he observes the cultivation of 
three cereals (barley, millet, and wheat) and the breeding 
of three domestic species (cattle, goats, and sheep). Both 
groups are found in the wild state only in Western Asia. It 
is thence that they have been propagated to other parts of 
the Oriental world. The chronological order of their diffusion, 
and consequently of civilization, would be (1) Babylonia, 
(2) Yemen, and (8) Egypt.’ We could not dispute the value 
of the arguments advanced by Schweinfurth. It remains 
none the less true that, in the present state of our knowledge, 
the cultivation and breeding of plant and animal species by 
men is demonstrated by plant and animal remains and imple- 
ments found “in situ’? in Egypt earlier than anywhere else. 
A thousand years before Babylon—several thousand years 
before Yemen—Egypt discloses tillers, pastoralists, and 
craftsmen at work. 

How did this commercial penetration of the Nile Valley 
by Egypt’s neighbours come about? Here we are once more 
confronted by the theory of an invasion coming from Asia or 
Arabia, of a military conquest by a better armed, better 
equipped people, who would have conferred upon the 
defeated Egyptians the blessings of their higher civilization. 
We have replied that no proof can be brought forward. 
Prior to 3500 B.c. it does not seem that any society existed 
outside Egypt sufficiently well organized to pursue a policy 
of conquest. The converse seems more probable; with 
greater essential verisimilitude we might imagine an occu- 
pation by the Egyptians of Palestine, whence they brought 

1 An interesting summary of Schweinfurth’s ideas will be found in an 
article by E. Hahn, ‘‘ Babylonien, Jemen, A®%gypten,” in Priissische 


Jahrbicher, CLXXXVII, i, pp. 49 7#f., on the occasion of the great scientist’s 
eightieth birthday. 


KGYPTIAN KINGDOM 165 


back the animals and plants lacking at home. But evidence 
is lacking or inadequate. And, in any case, why cling to this 
idea of a conquest one way or the other? North Africa, 
especially Egypt, is connected with Hither Asia and the 
South Mediterranean regions by soil and by race. Its animals 
and plants, taken as a whole, belong as much to Western 
Asia as to Africa,' and its inhabitants had commercial rela- 
tions by ship (Fig. 14) and by caravan with Arabs, Pales- 
tinians, and Mediterraneans from very ancient times. In our 
eyes such relations suffice to explain how in the neolithic and 
Thinite periods the Egyptians were able to procure from less 
civilized peoples, endowed with certain natural riches that 
they lacked, the grains and animals which were going to 
develop so luxuriantly in the Nile Valley. There was an 
exchange of economic elements just as the races were crossed 
and linguistic borrowings took place. Thus the period of the 
acclimatization in Egypt of wheat, vegetables, the vine, flax, 
and small and large cattle seems to imply continuous inter- 
course between Egypt, Yemen, Palestine, and the Mediter- 
ranean. That was, perhaps, the epoch when Egypt lived 
least isolated, because she was not yet self-sufficing; then 
commercial relations with neighbours, even culturally in- 
ferior, was necessary and fruitful for her people. 

Moreover, it will not be long before the situation is 
reversed. Here was Egypt, cleared, populated by peasants, 
enriched by domestic animals, gaining ground everywhere 
upon the desert, where irrigation canals diffused the fertiliz- 
ing water. This soil, well tilled, yielded an unparalleled 
return; the foreign products improved on it and became at 
home, till they actually excelled in quantity and quality the 
same products in their native lands, or, again, through the 
well-known virtue of the Nilotic environment they were 
transformed and acquired after a while a special character, 
henceforth invariable, peculiar to the Nile, and having what 
is called the ‘‘ fixity of the Egyptian type.’’* To paraphrase 
Herodotus’ words, Egypt is as a whole a gift of the Nile aug- 
mented by that of neighbours. Her fertile silt had, perhaps, 
to wait for the foreign grain. But then she was made anew 

1 Maspero, XX, vol. I, 33. 


2 Consult in this connection a remarkable chapter by Schweinfurth in 
Baedeker’s Egyft on ‘* The Origin and Present State of the Population.” 


166 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


and passed from the condition of a partially tributary 
country to the first rank as a centre of agricultural and 
artistic production and an exporting country as a result of 
her political organization. That industrial superiority which 
we detect by the old and new Stone Ages in the incomparable 
beauty of flint knives with ripple flaking, of flint bracelets 
and of hard stone vases, is reaffirmed in the Ancient World 
from the third millennium, and has been maintained for nearly 
4,000 years till the appearance of Hellenic industry about the 
fifth century B.c. All that which we may already call the 
foreign policy of Egypt will be governed by this priority 
in industrial and agricultural creation and this economic 
supremacy. Her population of tillers and artizans is glutted 
with wealth and seeks an outlet for her products; in return 
she remains dependent on her neighbours for some primary 
products. 

Egypt’s influence upon her neighbours is, perhaps, trace- 
able from the earliest days of human life. If we accept 
Sergi’s theory, which seems warranted, the paleolithic and 
neolithic men of Southern and Western Europe would belong 
to the same Mediterranean race as the first Egyptians. The 
‘* bridges *’ between Africa and Europe by Gibraltar, Sicily, 
and the Archipelago remained accessible above the waves till 
quite late in the neolithic age. By them certainly crossed 
the great African mammals who ranged the prairies and 
forests of quaternary Europe. Men and their products may 
have taken the same road. It would not, then, be by chance 
that the tools and weapons of the neolithic Europeans bear 
striking resemblance both in material and technique to those 
of the Egyptians ; it would not be accidental that the builders 
of the lake villages of Switzerland and Savoy cultivated for 
their food the three typical species of plant—barley, millet, 
and wheat—which the Egyptians had been the first to select.’ 
About 4500 B.c. the Egyptians began to work copper and 
fashion metal tools, while the rest of mankind still used 
stone; and then the technical supremacy of the Nilotes 
certainly procured them an irresistible ascendancy. Now, 
it is at this moment that Egypt’s ‘‘ neighbours ”’ appear on 
the first Egyptian monuments and that we can begin to study 
the mutual relations of the peoples of the Ancient East. 


1 Breasted, XXV (Nov., 1919), p. 426; de Morgan, XXXI, p. 169. 


EGYPTIAN KINGDOM 167 


Here we reach the firm ground of historical realities. It 
becomes possible to describe the Egyptians and their neigh- 
bours as they are portrayed by themselves on pictorial monu- 
ments, and not merely by defining races with the help of 
craniometry and philology alone. 


II 
THe EGYPTIANS AND THEIR NEIGHBOURS: RAcES AND 
TYPES 


The peoples whom the Egyptian monuments of the his- 
torical period depict are reducible to four types—Egyptians, 
Libyans, Semites, and Negroes. The first two belong to the 
Hamitic race; they are regarded as closely akin to the 
Semites, while they are fundamentally different from the 
African negroes. 

In the valley where the ‘ black-earth ”’ Qemt lies 
deep, dwelt the Men (remtu)—the Egyptians. Statues and 
mummies reveal them oval faced with prominent cheek- 
bones, deep-set eyes, short, straight, or slightly aquiline 
nose, and fleshy lips. They are generally tall, broad 
shouldered, with a straight, well-set neck, not flabby about 
the belly or the buttocks. The arm and leg muscles are not 
very highly developed externally. Their skin, which is white, 
becomes reddish-brown under the rays of the sun. Their 
hair black, not curly, is generally short, and protected by a 
cap or wig. The beard, rather scanty, is most usually shaved 
off. The ordinary costume is a loincloth for men and a tight- 
fitting robe supported by shoulder-straps for women. 

On the left bank of the Nile from the Mediterranean to 
Assouan, on both banks in the Sudan, and in the western 
oases dwelt the Libu=—Libyans.! They were nomads on the 
desert tablelands and sedentary in the oases and Nubia. 
Their race offers many examples of individuals with a fair 
skin, blue eyes, and fair hair, betraying a mixture of Hamitic 
elements with a people coming from across the Mediter- 
ranean. The Libyans are tall and strong, more muscular in 
appearance than the Egyptians; the plaited hair falls in a 
tress over one shoulder. Sometimes a little lock stands up 


1 The name Lidu does not appear till the XIX Dynasty; vide infra, 
p. 167. 


168 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


on their foreheads. They wear a pointed beard turned up 
slightly at the tip. Their dress is a loincloth, sometimes a 
woollen robe, gaudy and patterned. Men and women are 
tattooed and are loaded with bracelets and torques ; a leather 
sack protects the genital parts of males.? Beyond the 
Libyans we find the Tehenu in Marmarica, and in the region 
of the Syrtes live the Mashauasha (the Maxyens of the 
Greeks). 


South of the Nile, from the First to the Third Cataract, 





Fic. 15.—EcypTian Types (Op KINGDOM), 


stretched Nubia; its name was Kush in Egyptian. Tall of 
stature, with curly or straight hair, the Nubians (Satu), who 
include several tribes such as the Uauat, the Iertet, and the 
Imam,’ seem to belong to the same race as the Libyans. 
They are sharply differentiated from the Negroes (Nehesiu) 
with their flat noses, thick lips, and woolly hair, and from 
all the black-skinned peoples; the latter only appear late in 
the part of the Nile Valley colonized by the Egyptians.° 

On the right bank of the Nile in the southern part the 
Egyptians met the Mazoi, who seem to be the modern 
Bisharis. Towards the Somali coasts on the Red Sea shore 


* XXII, §§ 165-7. > CH. pp. 180 #f. below. 
* Junker, XIII, vol. VII, p. 12]. 


EGYPTIAN KINGDOM 169 


were located the people of the land of Punt. They had the 
same complexion and physical type as the Egyptians, save 
for a little beard with the end turned up as if twisted. The 
artists adorned the chin of the Egyptian gods with the same 
beard. 

On the east bank of the middle course of the river the 
mountains and steppes of the Arabian Desert were the 
domain of the Iuntiu (whose name was once read as Anu). 
They correspond to the Troglodytes whom Strabo (XVII, 
786) mentions in these quarters. They are Semitic Beduins 
living on pillage and the caravan trade. Along the isthmus 
and in the Peninsula of Sinai appear the Heriu-sha—** those 
who are upon the sands ’’—the Amu, the Mentiu, and the 
Sentiu, who are truly Asiatics, at once nomadic and 
sedentary. We shall describe the peculiarities of their types 
further on. 

In contrast to her African neighbours, the Egypt of the 
Thinites and Memphites appears before us as a State com- 
manding a political, military, industrial, and agricultural 
organization in the midst of peoples who are still for the 
most part in a state of nomadism without a true civilization. 
And so, compared to them, she will retain her eminent 
position throughout her whole history. 

The Nubians lived uneasily in the district of the cataracts, 
narrow and denuded, a mere water passage between fertile 
Egypt and the luxuriant regions of the Upper Nile, whence 
came wild-beast skins, ivory, rare essences and perfumes, 
and ostrich feathers. The Nubians acted as intermediaries in 
this petty commerce, and plied the trade of boatmen on 
the Nile or caravan guides across the desert. They often 
descended towards Egypt and the Delta, where they were 
engaged as agricultural labourers, but they were chiefly 
employed as mercenaries, guards, and policemen, posts of 
authority for which their martial and arrogant humour 
peculiarly fitted them. The Egyptians had soon to defend 
themselves against the excess of attraction exercised by the 
richer lower valley upon the less fortunate population of the 
Upper Nile. Later the danger came from the Negroes of 
the Sudan: rich in beasts and minerals, initiated into the 
secrets of metallurgy, they trickled through Nubia to 
Elephantine from time to time, launching their wandering 


170 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


and warlike tribes upon pillaging forays against the Egyp- 
tian towns. 

The Libyans on the river’s west bank, the Troglodytes 
on its east, convoyed the caravans bringing to Egypt the 
gold, skins, spices, and perfumes of Punt and Yemen, or the 
products of the Libyan oases and the flocks of Cyrenaica. 
To these nomads, pastoralists, and hunters, whose hungry 
cattle devoured the oases and the thin herbage of the desert, 
Egypt was a land to fall back upon, the market where they 
renewed their provisions. They came to barter their curdled 
milk, their cheeses, and their meat for wheat, and to seek 
manufactured articles to ensure a return cargo for caravans 
coming from Arabia or the Sudanese and Libyan countries. 

Against the background of the fertile loams of the valley 
these Libyans and Troglodytes assume the mien of starveling 
pillagers, always on the lookout for a chance to raid the 
Egyptian fellah, peaceful and absorbed in the tasks of farm- 
ing. They were never a source of real danger to the Egyptian, 
for they had as yet no swift mount capable of bearing loads ; 
the ass, their only draught animal, cannot travel very fast nor 
carry heavy loads; the camel, which will give mobility and 
power to the desert tribes in the days of Islam, though not 
unknown,’ was but little used.? Confronted with these 
nomads, Egypt was ever watchful and on guard and kept up 
police operations, for which she employed the Libyans them- 
selves. Several tribes, like that of the Mashauasha, entered 
her service as mercenaries. In the same way she recruited 
excellent troops among the Mazoi. The Pharaoh found it 
expedient thus to insure himself against thefts by paying, in 
the guise of wages, a premium to these incorrigible free- 
booters. It was only in the last days of the Theban Empire 
that the Libyans, grouped in a sort of federation, and set in 
motion by migration of peoples, became a serious menace to 
Egypt which was not to be conjured away by extemporized 
expedients.” Apart from these exceptional periods, the 
nomads came to attack Egypt only in isolated bands. 
Against such a jealous guard had always to be maintained, 


1 Schweinfurth (Zeztschr. f. Ethnol, 1912, p. 633) has drawn attention to * 
graffiti of the VIth Dynasty at Assouan representing a camel and its 
driver. 

* Cf. Lefébure, Le Chameau en Egypt. * Cf. pp. 336 ff. below. 


EGYPTIAN KINGDOM 171 


but the barbarians might be induced to accept a compromise 
by employment as mercenaries or traflickers, functions in 
which their talents found scope for expression. 


In regard to the Asiatics, Egypt was quite differently 
situated. Beyond the isthmus and the desert region, which 
sets a sandy barrier on the frontiers of Egypt for a distance 
of seventy-five miles, the Mediterranean coast of Asia opened 
its agricultural tablelands, its forests, and its natural har- 
bours, already devoted to maritime trade. Thither, too, 
came the products of the hinterland, a vast world of which 
the outposts alone were known to the Egyptians. There the 
States of Sumer, Akkad, and Elam were growing up by the 
fourth millennium s.c. From these peoples, who had 
reached varying degrees of civilization, the Egypt of the 
Pharaohs had no longer to borrow plants to cultivate or 
animals to rear (nevertheless, the horse came from Asia as 
late as the sixteenth century), but she imported primary 
products—copper, gold, iron, precious stones, building 
timbers, and woollen stuffs. Egypt for her part exported 
to Asia manufactures—furniture, weapons, and jewels—in 
great demand owing to the artistic and technical superiority 
of the factories of the Delta (below, p. 219). This trade 
crossed Syria and the desert regions on ass-back by caravans, 
and also went by sea. It is supposed, perhaps erroneously, 
that the ships were chiefly Asiatic or, if Egyptian, were at 
least manned by foreign crews. How far navigation extended 
in the Mediterranean we cannot say for certain, but it is 
undeniable that commercial intercourse with the AYgean and 
the coast of Palestine was already established; in the neo- 
lithic tombs of Abydos brown or red clay vases adorned with 
geometric patterns of incised lines, incrusted with white 
paste, or covered with punctured ornament, are of At‘gean 
provenance.! Direct or indirect relations between the Delta 
and Cyprus (the copper land) and North Syria therefore 
existed by the beginning of the historical epoch. All such 
peoples of the isles and the sea were called by the Egyptians 
Hau-nebu—i.e., the folk who are behind Egypt.’ 

Asia Minor did not only enjoy a long-standing and unin- 


1 XXII, 228; cf. de Morgan, XXXI, Figs. 126-127. 
2 The Egyptians faced south in taking their bearings. 


172 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


terrupted commercial intercourse with Egypt; it was destined 
to play a great political réle in relation to her. Throughout 
the history of the Orient, Asia’s position in respect to Egypt 
was like that of Germany to the Roman Empire—that of a 
great reservoir of peoples disparate in origin, reflecting the 
shock and recoil of the incessant migrations taking place 
farther north on the plains which extend from the present 
Russia to Tibet. Thence rolled in periodic tides of invasion, 
the last billows of which lapped Palestine and sometimes 
even the Egyptian frontier. The Pharaohs’ empire was 
therefore constantly threatened on its Asiatic flank and 
liable to receive the recoil shock of all the migrations and 
collisions of peoples in Asia. 


The reader will gather from these general considerations 
that, far from living in isolation, far from remaining cut off 
from the surrounding world, Egypt found herself the eyno- 
sure of envious eyes ever on the watch. On the one hand 
she possessed the attraction that a rich State ensuring peace, 
security, and food in return for service and manual labour 
exercises upon nomadic and hungry peoples; on the other 
her desert frontiers could only delay hordes of people in 
movement. No doubt Egypt long inspired her scattered 
and inchoate neighbours with respect for the prestige and 
strength of a centralized and policed State pertinaciously 
pursuing her task of internal development and prosperity. 
For long centuries she could exploit the resources in man- 
power and raw materials offered by her neighbours. But 
against pillaging by nomads and the overflow of migrant 
peoples she had, for her own safety, to prepare a plan, first 
of defence and then of conquest. As the centuries roll by 
we see Egypt taking defensive measures on her frontiers, 
concentrating little garrisons there and forbidding access, for 
instance, to Elephantine, to the Nubians and Negroes. Then 
she widened her zone of watchfulness, established marches, 
and entrenched herself behind a girdle of forts. Finally she 
took the offensive; on her Asiatic front, that most seriously 
menaced, she organized economic protectorates, and when 
that did not suffice to protect her from attacks and even pro- 
longed invasions, she decided on a military occupation of the 
turbulent lands. That involved a foreign policy experi- 


EGYPTIAN KINGDOM 173 


menting in world empire after the experiment of a centralized 
State, with the alternations of successes and reverses, the 
jealousies, and the resistance which such a policy provoked. 
The history of this military expansion, of this moral germina- 
tion, and of the economic development resulting therefrom is 
what we must now sketch in broad outline. In it Egypt, 
Chaldeza, and others, too, will in turn play the foremost part. 


III 
Tare EXTERNAL RELATIONS OF THINITE EGYPT 


From the accession of the Thinite dynasties to the end of 
the IlIrd Dynasty (8815 to 2850 B.c. approximately) the 
relations between Egypt and her neighbours, as far as the 
documents allow us to judge, had been sometimes peaceful, 
sometimes warlike, according as the tribes of the Nile 
borderland displayed respect for frontiers or tried to 
encroach on the cultivated land. The blame for the con- 
flicts does not seem to lie at the Egyptians’ door. It may 
reasonably be supposed that, absorbed in the great task of 
‘““the union of the two lands”? and of putting the whole 
valley under cultivation, the kings limited their efforts to 
repelling attacks and punishing nomads’ incursions by severe 
punitive expeditions and methodical raids, which still in- 
volved no occupation of the adjacent countries. 

Thus under Narmer the Libyans of the Marmaric coasts 
(Tehenu), who had allied themselves with the Egyptians of 
the Delta against the Egyptians of the south, were defeated, 
like their allies, by the King of Hierakonpolis. They had 
to pay tribute, and on the ivory plaques of Menes we behold 
them defiling before the king; for their hanging plaits of 
hair, the top-knots on their heads, and their pointed beards 
make them recognizable.* 

We saw that quite early there was an important caravan 
traffic between the Libyan tribes and the inhabitants of the 
oases on the one hand and the Nile Valley on the other. 
Besides cattle and various preparations of milk and cheese, 
the Egyptians used to buy from them a highly prized 


1 Quibell, Hierakonpolis, Pls. XV, XXVI, XXIX; Petrie, Royal Tombs, 
Ist Dynasty, vol. I, 4. 


174 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


** essence of Libya,’’! for we find it mentioned in all the lists 
of offerings which went to make up the repasts of the kings, 
the gods, and the deified dead. 

The Nubians, too, figure among the conquered on Menes’ 
tablets.” Khasekhem of the IInd Dynasty names them 
among the captives whom he carried home,* but no monu- 
ment justifies us in asserting that the kings of the first three 
dynasties conducted an offensive campaign in Nubia. 

On the eastern front, on the contrary, the first Thinite 
kings had overstepped their frontiers, not to repulse incur- 
sions by nomads, but, inspired by a definite plan of conquest, 
to lay hands on the copper mines of Sinai. We can well 
understand the cardinal importance to a nascent civilization 
of the mineral which secured to its owners copper tools and 
weapons at a time when all her neighbours, except the 
Sumerians, still used only stone tools and weapons. The 
rocky walls of the Wady Maghara concealed an abundance 
of more or less productive minerals—the turquoise stones 
containing 3 to 4 per cent. of copper oxide, a hydrosilicate 
of copper with a high metal content, and granites impreg- 
nated with carbonates and hydrosilicates of the same element. 
The importance of these deposits has, perhaps, been exag- 
gerated; the tendency to-day possibly errs on the opposite 
side.“ Berthelot admits that they may have played an 
important part in human evolution.*> It is probably in these 
mountain gorges round a fire kindled by nomads on ground 
strewn with the powdered mineral that man saw, for the 
first time in the Mediterranean region, copper, reduced by 
the heat of the hearth, separate out from the slack and 
trickle all red and gleaming among the ashes. Sinai was one 
of the places in the world where metallurgy was invented! 

On the Wady Maghara at Serabit-el-Khadim we can still 
see the mining galleries cut in the rock and pick up the stone 
picks and mallets used by the miners, the copper chisels for 
scraping the walls, and the crucibles employed for smelting 
the mineral on the spot, while the scorie still forms huge 

? Maspero, ‘‘ La table d’offrandes,”’ in IX (1897), p. 22. 

* Petrie, Royal Tombs, II, 3, 30a; de Morgan, XXXII, vol. Il, 1674 
Garstang, XII, vol. XLII, 61. 

3 Quibell, Hzerakonpolis, 36-41, 48. 


* de Morgan, XXXI, p. 114. 
® Compte-rendu de Acad. des sciences (Aug., 1896). 


EGYPTIAN KINGDOM 175 


heaps.’ The historical value of these remains is considerably 
increased by the fact that they are dated by bas-reliefs 
earved upon the rocks. The first known is the work of the 
Falcon-King Smerkhet, one of Menes’ successors; he is 
depicted in the full royal garb, wearing the white crown or 
the red, or, again, grasping a suppliant Beduin by the hair 
with one hand and raising a mace to slay him with the 
other.” After Smerkhet the majority of the Pharaohs till 
the exhaustion of the mines about the XVIIIth Dynasty sent 





Fic. 16.—SMERKHET IN SINAI. 


expeditions to Sinai and carved inscriptions on the precious 
metalliferous walls. 

It is important to note that the exploitation of the mines 
of Sinai was already an official undertaking of the Egyptian 
State, which retained a monopoly thereof. The inscriptions 
enumerate the officials in charge of the industry, some tech- 
nicians, some soldiers or sailors guarding the works or the 
security of the transport. Only a State could undertake 
great operations of this nature, which private industry could 
not have conducted successfully. The Thinite monarchy 
proved its utility by organizing the exploitation of the mines 
which was to transform the material life and the industrial 


1 Petrie, Simat; cf. Breasted, XXV (Dec., 1919), pp. 564-570. 
7 R. Weill, Recueil des inscriptions égyptiennes de Sinai, p. 97; Petrie, 
Sinai, Figs. 45-47. 


176 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


and political relations of its subjects. The Egyptian State 
therefore jealously guarded for itself and the community 
these reservoirs of metal which made possible the extra- 
ordinary expansion of its military power and industrial 
activity. 

Thus from the beginning of the world’s history the 
Pharaohs invoked the right of conquest which force alone 
justifies. The covetousness of the Heriu-sha, the first occu- 
pants of the country, and of the Amu, their immediate 
neighbours, was aroused when they learnt that the Egyptians 
were drawing from Sinai supplies of the red metal from 
which they made arms, tools, vases, and ornaments. One 
of Smerkhet’s predecessors, the falcon Den (Usaphais) had 
himself depicted ‘‘ crushing the Orientals.’’' In the future 
it was a commonplace in the records and bas-reliefs of the 
Pharaohs to recount their feats of arms against the wretched 
nomad tribes who would like to hold the miners to ransom 
or to receive their share of the metal of prestige. Later on 
the Egyptians had to defend the mines against the Asiatics 
and advance the domain of their arms. So from economic 
greed was born military conquest... The oldest known 
autocracy seized the mineral regions of Sinai which it needed, 
and 5,300 years ago began the long career of aggressions and 
of so-called economic wars which are the counterparts of 
civilization. 

North of Sinai the Pharaohs held under their sway the 
routes of access to Asia across the Isthmus of Suez and Sinai. 
In this region they encountered sedentary Amu, the nomad 
Heriu-sha (those who are on the sands), and Troglodytes 
(Iuntiu), and other Semitic tribes, the Mentiu and the Sentiu. 

These miserable people ambuscaded the caravans which 
brought from Asia pinewood in huge joists to floor and roof 
the royal tombs at Abydos, the minerals lacking in Egypt, 
and certain agricultural products, and which returned from 
the Nile laden with the manufactured articles of wood, stone, 
bone, and ivory, in which the unrivalled skill of the Egyptian 
craftsmen was embodied. To ensure the security of these 
trade routes the Thinite Pharaohs on more than one occasion 
had to send brief expeditions against the tribes to keep them 
in order for a time. 


1 Spiegelburg, XII, vol. XXXV, p. 38. 


EGYPTIAN KINGDOM 177 


With the islands of the A“gean trade was conducted over 
** the circle (of water) which girdles the Hau-nebu,”’ as the 
Egyptians termed the Mediterranean. From Crete they 
brought back Creto-Atgean vases with incised geometrical 
decorations, white filled on a black ground, or with spiral 
and flower patterns in white on a red ground, or, again, 
brown covered with punctured triangles.' Still, it is doubt- 
ful whether these commodities and others, such as amber, 
arrived direct from Europe; they were more probably tran- 
shipped at those Levantine ports which participated actively 
in trade long before the Pheenicians. The port of Byblos 
(Kben) in particular must long have been an important 
trading centre, since the old name for sea-going vessels in 
Egyptian is kbent—.e., ** boat of Byblos.’”? 


IV 
THE PLAN oF DEFENCE OF MEMPHITE Ecypt 


At the beginning of the [Vth Dynasty (about 2850 B.c.) 
the Pharaonic monarchy had succeeded in making its people, 
who now cultivated the soil rationally, tamed and domes- 
ticated animals, and knew the secrets of the extraction and 
working of metals, into a highly centralized State. And so 
the deliberate policy which had yielded such good results 
inland came to be applied as far as possible to Egypt’s 
relations with her neighbours. The kings of the I]Ird, IVth, 
Vth, and VIth or Memphite dynasties*® set themselves a dis- 
tinctly far-sighted policy to pursue. They were no longer 
content to react to the aggression of nomad tribes; they 
elaborated a plan of defence which quickly turned into an 
offensive, in virtue of the historic law that in dealing with 
nomads it is not enough to repel their attacks, but the war 
must be carried into the heart of the territories where the 
foe lurks. 

On the side of Libya the Pharaohs organized a ‘* march,”’’ 
which was named the ‘‘ Gate of the West’’ (a-imentt). 

1 Excavations at Knossos in the Cretan, middle neolithic level; cf. 
Dussaud, XXXIII, pp. 36 7.; Meyer, XXII, § 228. 

2 Sethe, XII, vol. xlv, 7. 


° For the internal history, see The Nile and Egyptian Civilization in this 
series. 


12 


178 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


Under Snefru (about 2840 B.c.) its control was entrusted to 
a high official Meten.1 This frontier was well guarded as 
long as the firm hands of the [Vth Dynasty kings* were on 
the helm, but under the Vth Dynasty (2680-2540 B.c.) the 
Libyans, taking advantage of a certain enfeeblement of the 
royal power, attempted an invasion the importance of which 
can be gauged by the vigorous effort needed to repel it. In 
the funerary temple of Sahura a bas-relief commemorates 
the Egyptians’ victory (about 2670) and the capture of 
enormous booty—128,400 oxen, 223,400 asses and goats, and 
sheep in proportion (of course, these figures must be taken 
with a grain of salt). The Libyan chiefs, long-haired, with 
a lock hanging down in front, tattooed on the body, girt 
about with fabrics of variegated wool, and decked with poly- 
chrome necklaces, are being led into captivity, and implor- 
ing the Pharaoh’s aman with outstretched hands.* The 
suppression of this attack must have been thorough, and its 
effect was lasting, for the Libyans remained tranquil for 
centuries and supplied the Pharaohs with mercenaries from 
the VIth Dynasty to the end of the Middle Kingdom (XIIIth 
Dynasty). A military pact, therefore, put an end to hos- 
tilities on the western frontier and won respect for the ‘* Gate 
of the West.’’ 

The same prudent policy was applied on the southern 
frontiers. Incursions of Nubians, pressed forward by 
Negroes, determined Zoser at the end of the IlIrd Dynasty 
(about 2890 B.c.) to occupy a march above the First 
Cataract, later called Twelve League Land (Dodekaschoine), 
which extended from Elephantine to Hierasykaminos.* A 
little later Snefru® set out from this base to make searching 
raids into the Nubians’ country, whence he brought back 
7,000 prisoners and 20,000 head of cattle. After a spell of 
peace under the [Vth Dynasty, King Unas at the end of the 
Vth Dynasty had to recommence military expeditions, and 
he set up a *‘ Gate of the South ”’ (a-shema)—i.e., a march.° 

1 Sethe, Urk., i, 2; cf. Brugsch, Dict. géographique, p. 1288. 

2 The builders of the great pyramids, Kheops, Khephren, Mycerinos, etc. 

3 Borchardt, Grabdenkmal des Kénigs Sahure, ii, p. 18. 

“ Sethe, Dodekaschoenos, and XII, vol. XLI, p. 58. 

5 Palermo Stone, Schafer’s edition, p. 30. 


¢ The names go back to the Old Kingdom according to a VIth Dynasty 
inscription which I annotated in C. R. Acad. des Inscrips. (1918), p. 105. 


EGYPTIAN KINGDOM 179 


Its fortified citadel was Elephantine, where a brick wall 
seven and a half miles long (dating from the XIIth 
Dynasty), which still survives, cut the valley and the routes 
giving access to Egypt from the desert. 

Nevertheless, these measures did not succeed in blocking 
the flood of Nubians who overflowed from the Sudan, sub- 
merged the Egyptian population, mingled with it, and then 
filtered into the Nile Valley. The blacks and negroids were 
roaming in quest of plunder or of work as agricultural 
labourers, policemen, or soldiers. The VIth Dynasty kings 
sought to discipline the whims of these rovers and to divert 
into regular channels this abundant man-power which was 
not without its dangers: they admitted the Negroes and 
Nubians as “ pacified ’’ (nehesiuhetpu),' and drew recruits 
for the army and for the gangs working the royal demesnes 
from among them. Not only did they raise troops from the 
tribes of the Uauat, the Iertet, and the Mazoi, but the chiefs 
had to supply men for gold washing and to provide wood, 
sranite, gums, resins, and other commodities, probably by 
way of tribute. To keep them in obedience it ultimately 
appeared necessary to occupy their territories. Pepi I carried 
explorations far up the Nile. The recent excavations by the 
American Universities in Nubia prove that the Nile was 
colonized up to the level of Kerma (Third Cataract), Napata, 
and Meroe. 

The most useful agents of Pharaoh in this head of Upper 
Egypt (tep-shema)? were the princes of Elephantine. Their 
tombs, cut in the Hill of Assouan, have preserved the narra- 
tives of their exploits in the Nubian lands. Herkhuf was 
several times sent by Merenra and Pepi II (about 2490 B.c.) 
to the land of Imam in the vicinity of the Second Cataract. 
On the second occasion he set out with a caravan of donkeys 
loaded with packs of cheap trade goods turned out by 
Egyptian small industry—necklaces, bangles, stuffs, and 
weapons. Received by the nomads with open arms, he 
boasted to them of the king’s power, gained their affection 
with presents, reconciled the hostile tribes who were fighting 
among themselves or with the Libyans, and persuaded them 

1 Decree of Pepi J at Dashur; cf. Moret, ‘‘ Chartres Vimmunité,” Part 


Ill, Journal Astatigue (1917). 
* XXII, § 265. 


180 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


to worship “all the Prince’s gods,’’t which was equivalent 
to a treaty of submission. Then, after an absence of seven 
months, he returned with 300 asses loaded with precious 
woods such as ebony, aromatic roots, gums, elephants’ tusks, 
ostrich feathers, beast-skins, and, finally, gold.” After one 
of these journeys Herkhuf brought back a dwarf of the Danga 
tribe. Such pigmies were highly prized at Court; they were 
employed to perform certain rites in the divine or funerary 
worships—dances peculiar to their tribe, to which a religious 
significance and a magic effect were attributed. And so 
Pepi II, hearing of Herkhuf’s return with the dwarf, sent 
him a letter of congratulation, which at the same time 
breathes impatient eagerness. ‘‘ When the Danga 1s with thee 
in the boat see that he have experienced men at his side lest 
he fall into the water; when he rests at night see that ea- 
perienced men repose beside him and that they look to him 
ten times. For My Majesty would rather see this dwarf than 
all the treasures that are brought from the land of Punt.”’ 

Despite all these campaigns, Pharaoh’s ascendancy was 
not yet really consolidated. Another lord of Elephantine— 
Pepinekht—was twice sent by Pepi II against the tribes of 
the Iertet and the Uauat, ‘* at the head of numerous soldiers 
selected from among the bravest.’? He brought back great 
booty in men and herds. In revenge, in the course of a fresh 
campaign in the land of the Uauat, Mekhu was slain and his 
body left in the hands of the enemy until his son Sebni, 
taking the head of another expedition, went to seek his corpse 
in order to inhume it in Egypt.* Thereafter texts are lacking 
which might inform us about the interventions of Memphite 
Pharaohs in Nubia. But what we know of Menenra and the 
Pepis allows us to infer that their successors inherited the 
tactics which are at all times imposed upon the colonizers 
of Central Africa—a defensive and offensive policy against 
marauding and quarrelsome tribes who always rise again 
after a few years’ respite and, across the vast Soudan, are 
untouchable. 

On the Asiatic side the first Pharaohs had embarked upon 

1 Inscription of Herkhuf, Urz., i, 126. The phrase might also be trans- 
lated ‘‘ worship all the gods for the Prince.”’ 

* For Herkhuf’s texts, see Breasted, XVII, vol. I, §§ 352 7f., and Sethe, 
Urk., i, 120 ff. 

8 Urk., i, 185 ff.; Breasted, XVII, §§ 365 7. 


EGYPTIAN KINGDOM 181 


a policy of equal watchfulness. Just as at the beginning of 
the IVth Dynasty they created marches on the west and 
south, so they built an entrenched camp to protect the four- 
teenth nome of Lower Egypt, or the Point of the East. The 
route from the north, which passes through Zalu to reach the 
coast of Palestine, was commanded by the forts of the Roads 
of Horus. The southern route, which crosses the Wady 
Tumilat, was dominated by fortified posts; their names— 
Gate of Imhetep and Quarter of Horus Nebmaat'—allow us 
to refer the organization of this base camp or this eastern 
march to King Zoser (by whom Imhetep was employed as 
architect about 2895 B.c.) and to King Snefru (Nebmaat, 
about 2840). Their watch extended as far as Sinai, which 
was embraced within this zone of attraction. There the 
Egyptians built shrines to Septu, the lord of the East, and to 
Hathor, and there we see King Snefru participating in the 
worship, included among “‘ all the gods.’”? That proves that 
Sinai was thenceforth occupied by the Egyptians. Here, as 
in Nubia, where Herkhuf had introduced the Egyptian gods, 
the latter were installed side by side with the local gods, and 
Pharaoh himself was worshipped at Sinai as a god. To 
establish this political cult in a foreign land was equivalent 
to setting up a protectorate. 

The frontier thus consolidated, nevertheless, did not 
prevent some attacks by Asiatics or Semitic nomads. Evi- 
dence of such is to be found in the pictures of victories left 
in Sinai by Zoser and his successors, Sanekht and Snefru. 
Under the reign of Snefru, the Palermo Stone makes a curt 
reference to “the arrival (in Egypt) of forty ships loaded 
with cedars.’’? That is a very important piece of informa- 
tion, since cedars can only come from the district round 
Lebanon; they were loaded at Byblos (Fig. 17). This event 
presupposes regular commercial relations, controlled by the 
State, between Egypt and the regions beyond Sinai. Did 
the cargo of these vessels represent a tribute imposed by the 
Egyptians? The theory is not improbable, but it awaits 
confirmation. 

1 Inscription of Unt, i, 21; Sethe, Urk., i, pp. 102-3; Breasted, XVII, 
i, § 812. 3 


2 Lepsius, Denkmdler, ii, 187; Weill, Recueil du Sinai, pp. 137 ff. 
8 Schaefer, l.c., p. 30. 


182 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


During the great age of power and prosperity that marked 
the IVth Dynasty, order reigned on the eastern front, but 
hostilities were renewed under the Vth Dynasty at the same 
time as closer relations seem to have been established 
between the Semitic peoples and the Egyptians. From the 
beginning of the Vth Dynasty the Pharaohs immortalized 
their names by erecting temples to the sun; these were 
sanctuaries of quite a new type with an obelisk in the centre,’ 
and the sun, Ra, hitherto far from prominent in the Egyptian 





Fic. 17.—EGypTIAN SHIP (OLD KINGDOM). 


pantheon, whose cult probably came from Asia, was exalted 
to the rank of chief god. The Heliopolitan priesthood suc- 
ceeded in imposing this cult upon the royal family. The 
Pharaoh, hitherto regarded as the earthly incarnation of the 
old national god, the falcon Horus, henceforth declares him- 
self the ‘‘son of Ra,’’? and at his coronation adopts, in 
addition to his Horus-name, a ‘“‘ solar’? name composed of 
a laudatory epithet of the god Ra. The temples dedicated 
to the sun attest the kings’ devotion to this new patron, who 
thereafter dominates Egyptian religion. Does this revolu- 
tion, the importance and meaning of which is not always 
grasped, mark a return of Semitic influence? Is the 
supremacy of Ra a victory for Shamash? Is the obelisk just 


1 Moret, XXIX, pp. 302 7 2 XXII, $250. 


EGYPTIAN KINGDOM 183 


a bethel? Is the solar doctrine due to a school of Semitic 
theologians?! We are still too imperfectly documented to 
be able to answer such questions, but the inability to eluci- 
date them does not entitle us to burk them. Whether the 
doctrines were directly borrowed, or whether a philosophy 
already in germ at Heliopolis were fecundated by contact 
with Asia, the theory of a Semitic influence at the time of 
the Vth Dynasty is strengthened rather than weakened by 
the facts that conflicts between Egyptians and Asiatics broke 
out afresh at the same epoch. 

For the first time an Egyptian warrior’s tomb has pre- 
served to us scenes from an expedition against a city, Nedia. 
The latter seems to be situated in Syria, for its inhabitants, 
with their heavy profiles, their long beards, braided hair, 
and long robes hanging down right over the low-set calves, 
exhibit all the features which will still serve at a later date 
to characterize the Semites. The town is represented by an 
oval enceinte flanked by towers, and this arrangement is so 
typical of Asiatic towns that Egyptian texts use this sign as 
the determinative for the cities of the countries conquered in 
Asia. Inside it the native population is panic-stricken and 
lamenting, while Egyptian soldiers place ladders against the 
walls and attack it with blows of the battering-ram. Then 
the women and children who survive the sack are being led 
off into captivity.” It is, unfortunately, impossible to assign 
this much-defaced painting to its exact date within the age 
of the Vth Dynasty. To compensate for this relief in the 
sun temple reared by Sahura tells us that this king conducted 
a campaign in Syria (about 2670 B.c.). We watch the em- 
barkation of troops on transports, and triumphal scenes on 
their return: in great ships, equipped with sails and oars 
and heavily rigged, the Egyptians stand to acclaim Sahura, 
while the Asiatic prisoners,’ clearly recognizable in physical 
type and costume, stretch out their hands to implore aman. 
Other reliefs show the king in his form as a griffin trampling 
Asiatics underfoot; before our eyes are portrayed the spoils 
of Asia—inter alia, bears from Lebanon.* All these pictures, 


1 For the affirmative answer see W. M. Miller, Egyptian Mythology. 
2 Petrie, Deshasheh, Pl. 4; cf. IV, vol. XXXII, p. 46. 
’ Borchardt, Sahura, I1, Pl. 15. 

4 Jbid., pp. 16 and 21, Pls. 3 and 8. 


184 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


although incomplete, can only be interpreted in the sense of 
an actual military intervention in Palestine and the coasts of 
Syria (about 2670 B.c.).1 

Now, if the Egyptians waged war in Asia Minor to found 
there a dominion, however precarious, is it not necessary 
to admit that commercial relations must have been further 
intensified, that exchange of ideas followed that of com- 
modities, and that, there as elsewhere, merchantmen and 
transports served as vehicles for religious doctrines? Hence 
it would also be possible that the philosophical speculations 
and the sometimes austere morality of Semitic theologians 
should have their repercussions even on the Osirian doctrine, 
which was developing at the same time in Egypt’ parallel to 
the cult of Ra. If these hypotheses be confirmed they will 
confer only added significance upon these first Egyptian 
establishments in Syria. 


To sum up, then, during the period of monarchical 
organization under Dynasties III to V the Egyptian Pharaohs 
did not pursue what we should call an aggressive foreign 
policy ; they consolidated their footing in the Nile Valley, 
occupied posts in Nubia and Sinai, and organized frontier 
marches, but except for the mines of Sinai, a reserve of metal 
on which the State laid hands, they conducted no expedition 
of conquest. The Pharaohs succeeded in enforcing respect 
for the Nile Valley by the neighbouring nomads. They were 
able to discipline and lead into the paths of civilization the 
more intelligent or manageable of the Libyans and Troglo- 
dytes who henceforth provided Egypt with labourers and 
mercenaries. This foreign policy was guided solely by the 
ambition to establish a unified and solid kingdom, secure 
against any attack by neighbours who had lagged behind at 
a rudimentary level of civilization, and for whom Egypt was 
an irresistible bait whetting their appetites. 

Yet in contact with the foreigners the Pharaohs’ dynasty 
was proudly conscious of its duties, its responsibility, and its 

1 Quite recently M. Montet has found at Byblos vase fragments bearing 
the cartouches of several Pharaohs of the VIth Dynasty (exhibited in the 
Louvre, 1922). 

* So Breasted, Religion and Thought in Ancient Egypt, p. 26. 


EGYPTIAN KINGDOM 185 


superiority ; the Egyptian people, too, awoke to conscious- 
ness of itself as an organized people in the midst of bar- 
barians. These sentiments, in which a nascent patriotism is 
revealed, are splendidly expressed in a hymn among the 
Pyramid Texts (VIth Dynasty). The rhythmic strophes are 
addressed to the creator of the world, Tum, and to Pharaoh- 
Horus. They extol the beauty and fertility of Egypt, called 
by the mystic name the Eye of Horus—t.e., the creation of 
Pharaoh-Horus—and boast of and admire her security. 





Hail to thee, Tum. ... Hail to thee, Creation of Horus whom He’ 
hath sheltered with His enfolding arms. 

He hath not suffered thee to obey the Westerners, 

He hath not suffered thee to obey the Easterners, 

He hath not suffered thee to obey the Southerners, 

He hath not suffered thee to obey the Northerners, 

He hath not suffered thee to obey the men of Earth’s centre, 

But thou obeyest Horus. 

’Tis He who hath adorned thee, 

>Tis He who hath built thee, 

*Tis He who hath founded thee, 

And so thou doest for Him all that He telleth thee, wheresoe’er He 
goeth. 

Thou bringest Him the waters of marshes rich in game that are in 
thee, 

Thou bringest Him the waters of marshes rich in game that shall 
be in thee; 

Thou bringest Him all wood that is in thee, 

Thou bringest Him all wood that shall be in thee; 

Thou bringest Him all food that is in thee, 

Thou bringest Him all food that shall be in thee; 

Thou bringest Him every offering that is in thee, 

Thou bringest Him every offering that shall be in thee; 

Thou bringest Him everything that is in thee, 

Thou bringest Him everything that shall be in thee; 

And thou takest them to Him in every place which His heart 
desireth. 

The gates (of Egypt) stand (fast) for thee like the god Tunmutef ; 

And they open not for the Westerners, 

They open not for the Easterners, 

They open not for the Southerners, 

They open not for the Northerners, 

They open not for the men of Earth’s centre, 

But they open for Horus. 

>Tis He who maketh them, 

>*Tis He who raiseth them, 











1 He comprises both the god Horus and the Pharaoh, his image upon 


earth. 


186 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


*Tis He who defendeth them against all the ill that Seth’ might 
work thee, 

For He hath founded thee in thy name Foundation, 

For He downeth Seth for thee in thy name Zown.? 


However reassuring the hymn may be, we hear in it the 
echo of a menace coming from the land of Seth, Asia. There 
civilized States were in existence, religious relations had 
developed in the train of commercial intercourse. It was the 
political situation in Palestine which, for reasons not explicit 
in the texts, forced the VIth Dynasty Pharaohs to send 
thither men-of-war in the wake of their merchant galleys, 
and armies in the footsteps of their traders. It is time there, 
too, to interrogate the traditions and monuments; perchance 
we shall find there the reasons for Sahura’s interference in 
Palestine. 

1 Seth, the foe of Osiris and Horus, is also the god of the Asiatics later 
called Sutekhu (Baal). 
2 Pyramid of Pepi II, edited by Sethe, Sgr., 587. In the last line there 


is an almost untranslatable pun between fown and the word denoting the 
subordination of Seth to Egypt. 


CHAPTER III 
THE SEMITIC WORLD TO 2000 B.C. 


Tue influence of other Oriental civilizations visible in 
Memphite Egypt implies the existence in Western Asia of 
people who had reached a stage of civilization comparable to 
that attained by the Egyptians. What do we know of their 
habitat, their origin, and their evolution? 


I 
THE SEMITES AND THEIR HABITAT 


Across the Red Sea and the isthmus the nature of the 
African continent is repeated : an immense table-land, shaped 
like a parallelogram, extends, arid and sandy, over four-fifths 
of the area. The name Arabia, which we restrict to-day to 
the lower part only of this parallelogram, ought to denote 
the entire zone as far as the Mediterranean and the 
Euphrates. In reality there lies there a homogeneous region, 
a veritable prolongation of Africa. Asia only begins with 
the uplands of Anatolia and Iran. 

The Asiatic Sahara is only watered and fertile at its 
edges. There the table-land of sand is transformed by the 
sea and mountainous excrescences, which completely change 
its climatic conditions. Four seas frame Greater Arabia— 
the Mediterranean on the north-west, the Red Sea on the 
west, the Indian Ocean on the south, and the Persian Gulf 
on the east. Such proximity to seas modifies for the better 
the climate of the coastal regions and gives them moisture 
propitious to vegetation and to agriculture. And so Yemen 
(Arabia Felix) may, perhaps, have been an early centre of 
civilization. 

On the other hand, on its northern verge the desert runs 
into a zone which underwent severe alpine folding in the 
tertiary epoch. There we find the true Asia, the skeleton 
whereof is composed of high table-lands arranged in chains 

187 


188 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


with successive crests and troughs. Their altitude is such 
that Anatolia and Iran possess perpetual snows and in places 
enjoy a heavy rainfall which feeds great rivers. 

Now, the mountains and rivers of Asia have exerted a 
double influence upon the Arabian plateau. Along the 
Mediterranean the folds of the Taurus emphasize the coast, 
and are prolonged through a double chain, Lebanon and 
Anti-Lebanon, and then through the terraces of Palestine 
right down to the Isthmus of Egypt. Parallel to the coasts 
a furrow is carved between Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon, and, 
prolonged through the deep depression of the Dead Sea, 
comes out at the eastern arm of the Red Sea, which we call 
the Gulf of Akaba. This is a sheltered road which duplicates 
that along the coast. In it are gathered the salt waters of 
the Dead Sea and the fresh waters of the Lakes of Genezareth 
and Merom. Through it pass the Rivers Jordan and Orontes 
and the natural routes which have led animals and men from 
Asia Minor to Arabia. On the other hand, on the eastern 
confines of the Arabian Desert the table-lands of Anatolia, 
Armenia, and Iran pour forth great streams strong enough 
not to be absorbed in the sands, rich enough in water and 
silt not to be overcome by the parched soil, but to cover it 
with a fertile slime torn from the mountains of Asia. Thus 
the Tigris, the Euphrates, and their affluents have made the 
north-east margin of Arabia what the Nile made Egypt— 
an immense oasis, Mesopotamia. But these rivers are also 
roads, so happily placed that the Euphrates forms a direct 
way from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf. On break- 
ing out from the plateau of Anatolia the Euphrates traces a 
curve, at the nearest point only sixty miles distant from the 
Afran, a tributary of the Orontes. After nearing the Medi- 
terranean so as almost to find its outlet into it, the Euphrates 
is turned back towards the east by a slight fold of land, 
and pursues its course, swelled by tributaries, in a widened 
channel to the Sea of Oman. 

Thus from Egypt to the Persian Gulf Nature has laid out 
waterways which lead from the isthmus to the Taurus, and, 
after a short and easy porterage, from the Taurus to the seas 
of the East. Astride these rivers and routes cities and 
kingdoms have been planted. On a map we get the im- 
pression of a gigantic crescent with its horns on the deltas 


189 


THE SEMITIC WORLD 





‘LSVY INFIONY AHL AO INDOSAAD AWLAIY IHL—' I] dVW 





VidVvav 





\ YINIHS gs x 139930 


WSIS, 


@ 
Nivy » aa, 


& 
eae 
, 
- 
& < 
aL 
L 


Be 
ae ee sea 
A hee ah ge 
7 _auorhgeg +=": 
L ‘Ve, 
Niece re 
Ps ; 
ws 
12) See 
~ 
(e) 
& 


ee 


1LLVHO 


um Se aete 


190 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


of the Nile and of the Euphrates. This ‘‘ Fertile Crescent ’”* 
will be the domain of civilizations, rivals of Egypt. Between 
the extremities of the crescent and over three-quarters of 
Arabia the desert, more or less arid, extends like an inland 
sea, tracked by the nomads, who go from one brink to the 
other and from one civilization to the other. 


On the immense plateau which we call Greater Arabia, 
and the centre of which is the sea of sands, developed at the 
circumference the Semitic race, nearly akin to the Hamitic 
race which colonized North Africa. The ethnic elements and 
the language of the Semites present a remarkable homo- 
geneity among all the peoples from Arabia to Palestine and 
Mesopotamia—peoples whom we shall call Arabs, Israelites, 
Canaanites, Phoenicians, Amorites, Chaldzeans, and Assyrians. 
But this multiplicity of designations proves that the Semitic 
race did not find a natural region where it could develop, 
preserving its unity. While the narrow valley of the Nile 
forced the Egyptians to concentrate, Nature in Western 
Asia dispersed men all along the periphery of the central 
desert and distributed them into distinct compartments : 
on the west—first, the coastal zone, and, second, the region 
of the table-lands of Palestine (the Shephelah) and the 
Jordan-Orontes depression (Hollow Syria or Ccele Syria); on 
the north the neck between the Orontes and the Euphrates ; 
on the east—first, the upper and lower valley of the Tigris- 
Euphrates (Mesopotamia), and, second, the terraces of Iran 
(Assyria and Elam). 

From the earliest moments when we begin to see men of 
Semitic race appearing on the stage of history they are 
already scattered, despite their undeniable basic unity. If 
we wish to define precisely the origin and relative antiquity 
of their several branches, we are confronted with great diffi- 
culties. Scientific explorations have as yet been but few in 
this vast domain; save at some isolated sites in Palestine, 
Mesopotamia, and Elam, no excavations comparable to those 
of Egypt have been conducted. And so neither in Palestine 
nor in Chaldza nor in Arabia have paleolithic stations come 
to light to indicate the existence of the earliest men. Neo- 
lithic deposits, witnessing to their progress, have only been 


1 This happy term is often used by J. H. Breasted. 


THE SEMITIC WORLD 191 


located in a minimal number. It is therefore impossible to 
follow in Western Asia man’s gradual initiation into 
civilized life, which Egypt has allowed us to sketch in 
broad outline. 

It by no means follows that man did not exist in these 
regions at a very early epoch. Palestine, Mesopotamia, and 
Chaldza have suffered no more than Egypt from glacial 
invasions. Their inhabitants were therefore not retarded 
in development like their contemporaries in Europe and 
Northern Asia. There is every reason for the belief that they 
found in Palestine and on the terraces of Elam overlooking 
Mesopotamia (as yet uninhabitable pending the warping of 
the valley) conditions of life favourable to civilization. But 
we know nothing about them before the end of the fourth 
millennium before Christ. 


It is on the Egyptian monuments that we first make their 
acquaintance. A palette of the Thinite King Den (about 
3175 B.c.) depicts that Pharaoh in the act of brandishing a 
mace over a kneeling ‘*‘ Oriental ’’ (iabtu) ; the victim’s body 
is slender and slight, his head long and narrow (dolichoce- 
phalic) with a straight or slightly aquiline nose; he wears 
long hair with a lock on the forehead, a pointed beard turn- 
ing up at the tip, and a loincloth like the Egyptians’. We 
meet the same type again on the bas-reliefs which celebrate 
the Pharaohs’ triumphs in the Sinai district (Fig. 16) from 
Smerkhet (about 3315) to Kheops of the IVth Dynasty (about 
9815 B.c.). The inscriptions call its representatives ‘* moun- 
taineers ’’ (Khastiu), or, more precisely, the Iuntiu (Troglo- 
dytes), Mentiu and Sentiu.2 The boomerang sign often 
accompanies these names and marks a favourite weapon of 
their owners. In this type and under these names we recog- 
nize the modern Beduins, the Arabs of pure Semitic stock 
whose haunts are the oases and the Arabian deserts (whether 
in the peninsula or on the right bank of the Nile), the moun- 
tains of Sinai, or the barren zone between Egypt and 
Palestine. The epithet ‘those who are on the sands” 
(Heriu-sha) befits such and was given them by the Egyptians 
at the Memphite epoch. 


1 XII, XXXV (1897), p. 8; cf. the Asiatic on our Fig. 9. 
2 Cf. the illustration given by Maspero, XX, vol. I, p. 351. 


192 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


On the Mediterranean coast in the Shephelah and Ccele 
Syria were peoples of more mixed race, probably sprung 
from a cross between Semites and Mediterraneans, whose 
elements held the coastal belt of Palestine and Syria. They 
are taller men, with broader shoulders, dolichocephalic, with 
aquiline noses, black, sometimes blue, eyes under bushy 
brows and heavy jaws, and wearing their hair long, some- 
times falling divided over their shoulders, and long square 
beards, but no moustaches. Their costume is less elementary 
than the nomads’; above the loincloth they wear a robe or 
shirt of wool diversified with coloured patterns, and they are 
shod with sandles or leather boots (Fig. 22). Their weapons 
are the boomerang and the bow. To this type belong the 
Canaanites!. and the Amorites, who had early founded 
sedentary colonies on the western edge of the Fertile 
Crescent. Thence they spread as far as Chaldea, perhaps 
at a very early period, in any case by the time of the foun- 
dation of Babylon (about 2700 B.c.). This is the chief mass 
of the population whose history has come down to us. Their 
type is easily recognizable on the Gebel-el-Arak knife-handle 
(Fig. 20) and on an ivory of the Thinite King Qa (published 
in this series in de Morgan’s Prehistoric Man, p. 100). This 
monument, assignable to the thirty-first century (about 
3125 B.c.), calls the Semite Setti—‘‘ the Asiatic ’’—from 
Setet—*‘ Asia ’’—words accompanied by a javelin and arrows 
beside the Beduins’ boomerang. The word Amu, which 
from the Old Kingdom designates the neighbours of the 
Heriu-sha,? is applied also to the Canaanites (cf. Fig. 22 on 
p. 244, below). 

North of Syria on the Lower Orontes and the land-neck 
between the rivers a third type of Semite is marked by a 
broad skull (brachycephalic) and a retreating forehead which 
emphasizes a heavily hooked nose such as is seen among the 
modern Jews and Armenians. Egyptian monuments of later 
date and the Assyrian bas-reliefs (Shalmaneser’s obelisk) give 
us faithful pictures of it; the Egyptian scribes confused them 
with the Amu and the Settiu. 

Among these diverse tribes the linguistic unity is remark- 

1 The name Canaanite does not appear before the middle of the second 


millennium (Meyer, XXI, § 354). 
2 Cf. Sethe, Urk., I, pp. 103, 134. 


THE SEMITIC WORLD 193 


able. It is the Semitic language, of which the typical ele- 
ments are found in the dialects spoken by the Arabs of 
Arabia, and comparatively derivative forms, modified by 
foreign contamination, in the Babylonian-Assyrian, Aramaic, 
and Hebrew dialects. 

Despite this common basis in race and language, the 
Semitic peoples are far from presenting that historic unity 
and continuity so striking in Egypt. Nature had distributed 
them among geographical compartments where the conditions 
of development were uneven, and so they only reached “ his- 
torical ’’ existence one after the other. The Beduin nomads 
had driven their flocks from Egypt to Iran and had guided 
caravans upon the inland sea of sand for thousands of years 
before coming to rest. They appeared first in Lower Meso- 
potamia (Shinar) accompanied by the Canaanites in a 
sedentary state, side by side with a non-Semitic people, the 
Sumerians. There, from the fourth millennium, they built 
numerous cities. Their folk colonized Upper Mesopotamia 
and the adjacent slopes to the east. This was the homeland 
of the Assyrians, who manifest their presence about the third 
millennium. These two groups of Chaldeans and Assyrians 
grew strong either by their own prolific potentialities or 
through the absorption of foreign elements and fresh Semitic 
migrations in the days of Sargon the Elder (about 2800) and 
Hammurabi (about 2100 B.c.). 

At this epoch the group of Amorite tribes was formed in 
Coele Syria and the oases round Damascus. They appear in 
political life first as the prey of the conquering kings of 
Chaldza at the beginning of the third millennium, and then 
as regular States about whom the Egyptians and Assyrians 
disputed with new groups, the Hittites and the Mitannians, 
who emerge in the north country in the second millennium. 
In Palestine the Shephelah was populated and adorned with 
towns by the time of Memphite Egypt at the beginning of the 
third millennium. But it had no national history till after 
the arrival of the Hebrews and Aramezans in the Jordan 
region and the oases east of the Dead Sea (about 1400 B.c.). 
On the Mediterranean coast the ports were thronged with 
shipping by the epoch of the Thinite Pharaohs (end of the 
fourth millennium), but they are only known from the Egyp- 
tian and Chaldean monuments; their own history only 

13 


194 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


begins with the Phcenicans in the north and the Philistines 
in the south (from about 1200 B.c.). 

As to Arabia proper, we know nothing of its existence 
apart from brief references in Egyptian and Babylonian 
texts. It is only about the year 1000 B.c. that the four 
States of the Mineans, Hadrumitians, Qatabanians, and 
Sabeo-Himyarites emerge from the gloom on the fertile 
coasts of Yemen. Thereafter we know scarcely anything 
except a Nabatean invasion in the direction of Petra (3800 
B.C.) till the moment of the great Arab conquests in the days 
of Islam. 


Attempts have been made to explain these successive 
appearances of different Semitic groups as the effects of great 
migrations periodically repeated. The starting-point of the 
hypothesis is that Arabia, the country where the Semitic 
race and language are preserved in the greatest purity, was 
actually the cradle of all the Semites. In the oases and 
favoured regions of the coasts the population would have 
multiplied till at periodic intervals, roughly once every 
thousand years, the Semitic race had to overflow, like a 
great reservoir full to the brim, in great streams of emigra- 
tion. The Chaldeans would have set out first about 3500 B.c., 
then the Amorites of the dynasties of Babylon about 2500, 
next the Hebrews and Aramzans towards 1500, and there- 
after the Nabateans and the Arabs of Islam.* By such 
successive waves from Arabia the advocates of this theory 
would explain the stringing out of various civilizations in 
history which appear all along the Fertile Crescent. 

This theory, based exclusively on the fundamental unity 
of the Semitic race and language, does not explain the real 
and early diversity of the tribes and their dialects. It lays 
itself open to severe criticism by pretending to derive from 
a partly desert country, of which we know nothing before 
the first millennium, peoples who reveal themselves already 
organized and civilized during the fourth. In a word, its 
most solid foundation is the ignorance under which we have 
long laboured as to the historical origin of the Chaldeans, 
Canaanites, and Palestinians. Such argumentation ab 1gnor- 


1 See the summary of Winckler’s theory (Geschichte Babyloniens und 
Assyriens) given in Clay, The Empire of the Amorites, p. 28, XXXIII. 


THE SEMITIC WORLD 195 


antia is being daily undermined by the archeological excava- 
tions which are becoming more numerous since the Ancient 
Kast has been opened up to European investigation. So the 
historian Albert Clay’ has no difficulty in convincing us that 
these successive waves of Arabian emigration provide only a 
superficial and ill-founded explanation. Undoubtedly in a 
region which is essentially a thoroughfare, and the centre of 
which is a sea of sand, there have always been nomads and 
currents of migrating hordes. But the Egyptian and Baby- 
lonian documents, scrutinized with such patience and _in- 
genuity by Clay, have furnished linguistic, historical, and 
religious proofs of the existence at a remote date of the 
peoples termed Amorites in Canaan. It is open to us to 
ask whether they did not at certain epochs contribute to the 
Chaldzans’ culture rather than receive enlightenment from 
these earlier known neighbours. Even to-day the Fertile 
Crescent is studded with tells where the earth covers the 
remains of very ancient civilizations. When the excavator’s 
pick has uncovered them it is probable that we shall discover 
in Palestine and Canaan the remains of cities or kingdoms 
contemporary with Babylon and Assur. It is there in the 
fertile uplands and luxuriant oases of Ccele Syria, Damascus, 
and Mesopotamia, rather than in Arabia, that the “ cradle 
of the Semites ’’? has some chance of being a reality. 

All around the fertile or arid plains held by the Semites 
existed other peoples belonging to different races, come from’ 
distant hinterlands, attracted by the water, the sun, the 
vegetation, the access to the sea that the fortunate regions 
of the Fertile Crescent had to offer. Such are the peoples of 
the Taurus, Hittites, and Mitannians on the north, the tribes 
of Lake Van on the north-east, and the Parthians, Kassites, 
Sumerians, and Elamites on the east.?, They will appear 
before us in history one after the other, and will be followed 
by many more. For the most part we only catch glimpses 
of them in their relations with the Semites, and we shall 
describe them as and when they emerge on the frontiers of 
Mesopotamia. 


1 XXXIII, chap. ii, ‘‘ The Home of the Semites.” 
2 Cf. Ed. Meyer, XXII, § 363. 


196 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


II 


THe NoMApDIC SEMITES AND THEIR PRIMITIVE 
INSTITUTIONS 


The first human settlements in Western Asia are known 
to us in Lower Mesopotamia. Still, it is probable that, as 
was the case with Egypt, the great river valley was only 
habitable many centuries after the oases and steppes of the 
Arabian Desert. Eduard Meyer has shown that the religious, 
political, and intellectual civilization of the Semites indicates 
that they were originally a folk of the desert 3} numerous 
Semitic tribes have never advanced beyond this stage of 
evolution. We must therefore seek the starting-point of 
social life in Western Asia in the simple forms of an organiza- 
tion of nomads.” Pastoral life on the table-lands of Palestine 
and in the interior of the Fertile Crescent has preceded settle- 
ment in the valleys suitable for agricultural labours. 

The picture we may make of the first Asiatic nomads will 
closely resemble that which we have drawn of the hunters of 
the Libyan Desert before their descent into the valley of the 
Nile. They lived on game which they brought down with 
their arrows, hunting-poles, and boomerangs, and, at an 
already more advanced stage of culture, they bred herds of 
goats, sheep, and cattle, which they drove before them from 
pasture to pasture. Asses served as beasts of burden, and 
the capacity of their draught animals was later increased ten- 
fold by the horse and the camel. This sort of life necessitates 
a continual mobility, whether in pursuit of game or in quest 
of fresh pastures; for a few weeks’ sojourn suffices for the 
flocks to crop the sparse vegetation and strip the lank shrubs 
of the steppes. Property in land, agriculture, and lasting 
settlements in permanent villages are unknown; brief halts 
under the shelter of movable tents are the only respites 
from pilgrimage. The nomads live in families ; the father 
enjoys the prerogatives of an absolute head. An assembly 
of families constitutes a tribe, but the latter normally con- 
sists of the direct or collateral branches of a single family, 
increasingly prolific and developed, whose members bear the 


1 XXI, § 536. 
2 Cf. Isidore Lévy, ‘‘ Les Horites”? in Revue des Etudes juives (1906). 


THE SEMITIC WORLD 197 


same name as that of their common ancestor—the progenitor 
of the family turned tribe. 

All the members of a tribe recognize each other as 
brothers by blood, but this relationship, the condition of 
entry into the tribe, can be acquired by the rites of ‘* blood- 
brotherhood ’’ and by adoption. Under the authority of the 
head of the family the tribe’s members live on a footing 
of complete equality. However, there exists a council of 
elders (cf. the Saru in the towns of Egypt, p. 124), which 
assists the father in the defence of the material and moral 
interests of the family group. The rights of each individual, 
and the relations of the tribe with neighbouring tribes, are 
governed by traditional precepts handed down from genera- 
tion to generation. Respect for plighted faith and particular 
covenants, the ‘*‘ blood feud ’’ to avenge crimes outside or 
inside the family, and the duty of hospitality to individuals 
who seek refuge, are binding upon all the tribe’s members 
collectively. Finally, religion constitutes the most solid 
bond. The Semites people the terrible or desolate aspects 
of the desert with spirits, demons, and spectres, but they 
worship beneficent gods who inhabit the moon, the sun, the 
mountains, the springs, the trees, and sometimes the animals 
useful to man. Above all, each human group acknowledges 
itself as tributary to a divine power which sometimes gives 
it its name ; so Edom and Gad south of Syria, and Ashur and 
Amurru in the case of the Assyrians and Amorites, are at 
once the names of the deity, the tribe, and the city where it 
settled. In this divine force the tribe will recognize its lord, 
its supreme king. He fights for the tribe, governs it by 
inspiring the father, and incarnates himself in an object or 
emblem which becomes a rallying standard.! 

The transition from nomadic to sedentary life comes 
about through the pitching of tents round a spring, at a ford 
important for commercial intercourse, or in one of the fertile 
sites in Ccele Syria or Mesopotamia after the river system 
had become regular and allowed settlement by men. 
Gradually the tents are replaced by huts of wattle or of 
mud, sometimes by dwellings excavated in the hillside or in 
natural caves. Finally, the advantages of a regular, varied, 


1 Ernest Renan, Histotre du Peuple d’Israel, i, p. 75; Ed. Meyer, XXI, 
§§ 333-351. 


198 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


and certain diet induce the nomads to cultivate plants, to 
train more numerous beasts for agricultural work, and to set 
up workshops for weaving wool, manufacturing implements 
of stone, clay, and copper, and for all the primitive indus- 
tries. Thereafter the clusters of tents become villages, the 
villages form federations, real and personal property wins 
recognition, and the need of a State organization makes 
itself felt. Then the tribe elects a chief or king. It is in this 
stage of social organization that we find the sedentary popu- 
lations in Syria about 2000 B.c. as the Egyptian, Babylonian, 
and Hittite texts disclose them. In more favoured regions 
the development of settled tribes had been quicker; in 
Mesopotamia we see them masters of a mature culture 
already in the fourth millennium, and the activity of these 
settlers creates the civilization of Western Asia. 

But nomadic tribes, numerous and shifting, never cease 
to subsist on the bosom of this sea of sands, on the shores of 
which the great cities of Chaldea, Syria, and Damascus will 
grow up like ports. The reasons for their existence are the 
attractions of the free adventurous life and the profitable 
loot of sedentary States, which seem to amass wealth and 
luxury just for the benefit of bold nomads. Later, when the 
States learn the art of self-defence, the barter of the products 
of flocks and herds—meat, wool, and dairy produce—for the 
manufactures of urban artisans and the crops of peasants 
helps to keep them to the steppes. The shepherds of the 
deserts command the caravan routes which traverse their 
sands. They therefore exploit the merchants of Chaldexa 
and Syria, to whom the nomads act as guides and lend 
beasts of burden, and on whom they live, sometimes by 
insuring security of transit in return for good pay, sometimes 
by giving themselves up to the fruitful plunder of the con- 
voys. Throughout the whole history of the peoples of the 
Orient these nomads have lived on the confines of the 
sedentary nations, an element of unrest and _ perpetual 
insecurity, but also a vital spring of refreshment and new 
youth for the urban populations. Now, if they persist in this 
elemental life to our own day, outliving great empires, this 
very persistence proves that they are a necessary element 
under the conditions offered by Nature to the Oriental 
peoples. 


THE SEMITIC WORLD 199 


Ill 


ELAMITES, SEDENTARY SEMITES, AND SUMERIANS IN 
SHINAR 


The civilization of the sedentary Semites which appears 
in Chaldea about the middle of the fourth millennium before 
our era is already in the phase of city life, and presents the 
institutions, arts, and trades (including metallurgy) of a 
mature society. On the other hand, east of the valley on 
the uplands of Iran in the district of Elam it has been 
possible to penetrate to the chalcolithic period in the history 
of human development. At Susa, J. de Morgan’ has dis- 
covered beneath an accumulation of ruins twenty-five metres 
deep a fine geometrically decorated pottery, with implements 
of polished stone, and then vases cut out of hard rocks, and 
copper tools and weapons. At Mussian, a locality Just over 
100 miles west of Susa, arms and implements of flint and 
obsidian are associated with coarse and fine pottery and 
plentiful copper objects. Ceramics and metallurgy present 
curious analogies both in decoration and in process of manu- 
facture with those of prehistoric Egypt.’ But even when 
writing makes its appearance, no similarity can be detected 
between the language and script of the Elamites and those 
of their neighbours in Mesopotamia or Egypt. Judging by 
their portraits on later monuments, the Elamites were moun- 
taineers, tall and muscular, wearing the hair long and the 
beard square-cut. Their language is neither Aryan nor 
Semitic. It is a branch of the family which we call Anzanite. 
Such tongues belong to a non-Semitic race very early settled 
in the highlands from the Caucasus to the Persian Gulf. 
Finding on the southern edge of Iran a rich and healthy 
country with valleys conveniently situated for agriculture 
and hills adapted for pasture, with stone quarries, mines, 
and forests,? they created a vigorous civilization the 
proximity of which was always menacing for Mesopotamia. 

In the valley itself we know as yet no neolithic remains. 
It is likely that in Chaldea, as in Egypt, the oldest alluvial 
deposits to-day cover the first human settlements. It is to 


1 de Morgan, XXXI, p. 102. 2 XXXI, p. 104. 
® Clay, XIV (Oct., 1921), p. 255; cf. Archeologia, LXX. 


200 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


be hoped that soundings in the river-silt which has been 
spread in the course of centuries on the banks of the 
Euphrates will reach deposits of neolithic artifacts and 
primitive pottery. Taylor and Thompson have, indeed, 
found flint implements at Eridu, but it is hard to date them 
accurately and to separate them from the bronze industry, 
which is brought to light everywhere in the deepest strata 
in Mesopotamia.* 

The earliest inhabitants of Chaldza were not all Semites ; 
they belonged to two distinct races. In the south lived a 
dolichocephalic people with a broad fleshy face, always clean- 
shaven, and with a big nose prolonging the line of the fore- 
head without any intervening depression, with the eyes set 
widely apart and rather slanting, and a vigorous, thick-set 
frame, but short in stature. Such are the Sumerians, also 
descended from the table-lands of Iran at the remotest epoch ; 
for they seem to be the first colonists of Mesopotamia. We 
are at a loss with what race to connect them. They are 
neither Aryans nor Semites, and yet very different from 
the Elamites.* They have been compared, now with the 
Turanians of to-day, now with the Dravidians of India. The 
most probable theory derives them from Turkestan. The 
Pumpelly expedition unearthed near Merv pottery and 
statuettes characteristic of the Sumerians’ civilization. 
Driven to emigrate by the progressive desiccation of the 
Turanian highlands, they would have sought a fertile and 
well-watered region farther west; after crossing Iran they 
came out upon the uplands overlooking Mesopotamia.* They 
seem to have made attempts at settlement in the north- 
western region, where Cappadocia and Assyria will arise later 
on. But the major part of their tribes settled in Chaldea. 
There they found the material means to the development of 
a civilization which appears abruptly before our eyes in full 
prosperity about the end of the fourth millennium. At 
this moment the Sumerians were a people of farmers and 
merchants, acquainted with the cultivation of grains and the 
rotation of the crops, able to domesticate animals, working 
copper and gold, and building houses, temples, and palaces 
of brick. They spoke a language of agglutinating type and 


1 Clay, i.¢., p. 254. 2 Cf. Meyer, XXI, § 362; Hall, XIX, p. 175. 
3 King, XXXV, appendix i. 


THE SEMITIC WORLD 201 


had invented a pictographic script, later conventionalized 
(through the use of brick and the stylus as writing materials) 
into cuneiform (wedge-shaped) signs. 

North of Chaldza about the same time the Semites appear, 
coming from the west, whether that word be taken to mean 
far Arabia or the Amorite country close by in the Fertile 
Crescent. It is questionable whether they preceded or 
followed the Sumerians in Mesopotamia. It is generally 
conceded that the priority belongs to the Sumerians, for in 
the present state of our knowledge it is the Sumerian cities, 
Ur, Uruk, Nippur, that appear at the dawn of history. But 





Fic. 18.—SUMERIANS (FROM THE STELE OF THE VULTURES) 


this land has been scarcely touched by excavation. More 
thorough explorations may perhaps cause us to revise this 
judgment if they prove that Canaan and the Amorite regions 
were populated and exploited at a very early date, as some 
historians suppose, and that the nomadic Semites soon 
transplanted their tents from the valley of the Orontes to 
that of the Euphrates. There they certainly reappear very 
early at Mari on the middle reaches of the river, and at Kish 
in Northern Chaldea.* 

However, it is proved that the original civilization of the 
Sumerians excelled that of the Semites; the latter borrowed 
from their southern neighbours that cuneiform script which, 
till the invention of the Phceenician alphabet (about 1200 B.c.), 


+hClay, be. 


202 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


served to transcribe the diverse tongues of nearly all the 
peoples of Western Asia. The Sumerians, on the other 
hand, are supposed to have been indebted to the Semites— 
for their gods in particular, which appear even in the first 
monuments with beards, long hair, and variegated robes of 
wool; in the light of these characters which differentiate the 
Sumerian gods sharply from their votaries, clean-shaven, 
with short hair and clad in linen, it has been recognized that 
an intellectual and social element of the highest importance, 
supplied by the Semites, has been imposed on the Sumerians. 
The arguments for and against the priority of the Sumerians 
therefore balance each other; it is a problem to which we 
must expect the key from a more methodical scientific 
exploration of Mesopotamia as a whole. 

To sum up, then: from the earliest historical period (t6% 
in the fourth millennium s.c.) three mature civilizations 
flourished in Western Asia—those of the Elamites, the 
Sumerians, and the Semites. In their vicinity, or behind 
them, sooner than we can descry them, reserves of people 
were being pressed forward on the Iranian plateau, in Ana- 
tolia, and in the region of Canaan. 


IV 
From Kinepoms To Empires oF SEMITES 


A detailed account of the historical events in Chaldexa is 
given in M. Delaporte’s work, Mesopotamia, in this series. 
We have here only to pick out the main lines and, if possible, 
to plot the curve of the historic destinies of the Sumerians 
and the Semites. 

Tradition reports that in Chaldea, as in Egypt, a divine 
** history ’? had preceded human history; the Creation of the 
World and the Flood are the chief episodes therein. After 
the Deluge royal dynasties, enumerated on cuneiform tablets 
unearthed at Nippur, begin.?, No exact date can be fixed 
prior to 2474 B.c. (the accession of the IIIrd Dynasty of Ur). 

* Ed. Meyer, ‘‘ Semiten und Sumerier ” (Abhandl. Akad. d. Wiss. Berlin, 
1906), and XXI, § 362. 

* Clay, XIV, l.c., pp. 242 #.; Langdon, XIII (1921), pp. 133 #f.; cf. 


Delaporte, Mesopotamia, pp. 20 f. These tablets give for Chaldea the 
equivalent of the Turin Papyrus for Egyptian history. 


THE SEMITIC WORLD 203 


But the dynastic lists, giving the totals of regnal years, 
sometimes (as near the beginning) fabulous, more often 
reasonable, allow us to reconstruct the outline of the royal 
families and the names of the leading sovereigns to a period 
which may go back to the beginning of the fifth millennium. 
Beginning with the reign of Mesilim (of the IIIrd Dynasty 
of Kish about 3680 B.c.), some rare monuments allow us to 
check the veracity of the lists. 

Chaldxa, called in Semitic Shinar, consists of the lands 
between the Tigris and the Euphrates in the last stages of 
their seaward course. It is an oasis on the edge of the 
Arabian Desert, not more than sixty-two miles long and 
twelve and a half miles wide. It is thus much inferior in 
size to Egypt, which is itself no extensive region. From the 
first we find a great number of cities, both in the northern 
part—Akkad (Semitic)—and in _ the southern—Sumer. 
Among these towns were eleven cities of royalty, capitals 
of successive dynasties: three in Sumer—Uruk, Ur, and 
Adab; four in Akkad—Kish, Akshak (Opis), Agade, and 
Isin ; one on the Middle Euphrates—Mari; one on the uplands 
whence the Tigris flows—Gutium; and two in Elam—Awan 
and Hamazi.! Other great towns vied with these—Nippur 
(the sanctuary of the national god Enlil) and Lagash (Tello) 
in Sumer, and many towns the names of which we know 
without being able to locate their sites. 

It is a sign of high and ancient civilization that so many 
towns should have commanded military, administrative, and 
financial resources sufficient to make them capitals in turn. 
In Chaidea, as in Egypt, the city is the old nomad tribe now 
fixed on the soil which it tills. It has built a temple for its 
god, a palace for its king, a citadel and walls to protect its 
peasants, who return every night from the fields, and the 
merchants and artisans who now open shops and booths. 
Of the tribal life that preceded urban settlement we know 
nothing, save those general traditions about nomads which 
we have summarized above. Hidden from us, too, are the 
hard centuries of apprenticeship during which the nomads 
submitted to the conditions of agricultural life in Mesopo- 
tamia, tried to regulate the rivers by dykes and canals, and 
learnt the necessity of substituting irrigation directed by 


1 Clay, l.c., p. 243. 


204. FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


man for the disorderly flood. Here, as in Egypt, Nature 
imposed upon the Sumerians and Semites the thrifty disci- 
pline of agricultural labour. It obliged them to co-ordinate 
their efforts with those of their neighbours, man with man, 
city with city. At the same time they had to protect them- 
selves against the attacks of the nomads left in the desert 





Map III.—SHInar or CHALDAA. 


and of the mountaineers of Elam and Iran. At the end of 
the fourth millennium the garden of Mesopotamia, with its 
wheat-fields, its orchards, its palm-groves, its vines, its 
pastures crowded with herds, its rich industries, and the 
treasures accumulated in its temples and its warehouses, 
appeared as a land of promise between the sands of the 
desert and the rugged mountains of Iran. Throughout its 
history it attracted the famine-stricken, the plunderers, and 
the ambitious. The task of ensuring collective security and 
the duty of preserving the fruits of all this labour in town 
and field compelled the chiefs to plan the combination of 
cities into kingdoms, then the foundation of an empire which 


THE SEMITIC WORLD 205 


should impose its force upon its neighbours and radiate 
civilization, commerce, and religion over all the Fertile 
Crescent. 


By the earliest times Sumerians and Semites had out- 
grown the phase of isolated cities. Perhaps the first two 
dynasties—those of Kish (in Akkad) and Uruk (in Sumer)— 
were parallel and contemporary, like the royal houses of 
Buto and Nekhen in prehistoric Egypt.1. But dating from 
the next dynasty (Ist Dynasty of Ur), Sumer and Akkad 
were subject to the same authority; the eleven cities of 
royalty which we have enumerated were accepted as 
sovereign by all Shinar. Political unity superimposed upon 
urban division therefore existed here at the end of the fourth 
millennium B.c. However, the old traditions of indepen- 
dence that each city retained as a memory of the days when 
its inhabitants were free nomads had given a very peculiar 
character to this unity. Till the rise of Babylon (2225 B.c.) 
no city in Shinar had been able to claim the title of capital ; 
the supremacy passed thrice to the Sumerians, four times to 
the Semites, twice to Elam, once to an eccentric city, Mari, 
and once to the barbarian mountaineers of Gutium. Let us 
add that some cities, not classed as dynastic, such as Lagash, 
sometimes lorded it over all the rest. Is not this a sign that, 
if political unity were recognized as necessary, there was yet 
such an equilibrium of forces between the cities that for 
centuries none could perfect that unity to its own profit 
during the first historical period ? 

Nevertheless, a principle of authority and unity existed 
in Chaldea. We shall not be surprised to learn that it was 
in the hands of a god. In the non-dynastic town of Nippur 
in Sumer resided the god Enlil, the highest religious authority 
in Shinar.* Whatever dynasty be in the ascendant, it is 
Enlil who chooses the king, consecrates him as his vicar on 
earth (patesi or ishakku), wages wars, concludes alliances 
and treaties, and inspires laws, and that not only for the 
Sumerians, but also for Semites and Elamites when the 
hegemony passes into their hands. It is probable that 

1 Langdon, J.c., p. 183. 


* Cf. Clay, XV, l.c., p. 260, and L. Legrain, Le temps des rots d’Ur 
(1912), p. 6. 


206 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


Nippur and Enlil existed from very early times and that 
their prestige dates from an era anterior to the first dynasties 
of Kish and Uruk. In this primordial god the three races, 
Sumerian, Semitic, and Elamite, found their unity and 
hallowed their alliance. 


At the time of the IVth Dynasty of Kish several cities in 
Shinar commanded the wealth which incites to a policy of 
expansion and the military strength which permits of its 
execution. The king of a Sumerian city, Eanatum, patesi of 
Lagash, founded his power by crushing the King of Umma 
in a battle described on the Stele of Vultures now in the 
Louvre. He received from Enlil the investiture as King of 
Sumer, Akkad and Elam (about 3050 B.c.). One of his 
successors at Lagash, Urukagina, continued his enterprise, 
but he made bold to choose a new god of empire, Ningirsu, 
whom he opposed to Enlil. This sacrilege was punished. 
Lugalzaggisi, patesi of Umma, avenged his city and his god, 
overthrew Urukagina, and, thanks to Enlil, conquered “‘ all 
the lands from the rising to the setting sun, from the Lower 
Sea (Persian Gulf) to the Upper Sea (Mediterranean).’’' For 
the first time a king of Shinar made his way up the 
Euphrates to the bend which approaches the Mediterranean, 
and descended the horn of the crescent which leads to the 
coast of Syria (about 2900 B.c.). 

This way once opened, a dynasty of Semites, sprung from 
the city of Agade, succeeded in enlarging it. About 2850 B.c. 
Sargon of Agade established an empire which embraced all 
that was civilized in Asia Minor. Enlil gave him Sumer and 
Akkad, and then *‘ the high land of Mari (Middle Euphrates), 
Iarmuti (on the coast of Syria), the land of Ibla (?Amanus) 
with its cedar forests and its silver mines (the Taurus 
mines).’’* This quotation enumerates all the aims which 
Sargon had in view: access to the Mediterranean indis- 
pensable as an outlet for the agricultural and industrial 
wealth of Shinar to new markets, the quest of great pines 
alone able to supply the building timber needed for palaces 
and ships, the search for precious metals, the control of 
mines that should furnish Chaldzan industry with the indis- 


1 Thureau-Dangin, Kénigsinschriften, p. 152. 
2 Clay, XXXIII, p. 95. 


THE SEMITIC WORLD 207 


pensable raw materials and priceless revenues for the imperial 
coffers. Similar motives had inspired the first expeditions 
ot the Pharaohs in Egypt—the copper mines of Sinai, the 
cedars of Lebanon, and mastery of the sea routes. In the 
foundation of the empires of the Orient, material and 
economic interests counted far more than the personal 
ambition of the sovereigns. 

Sargon earned the prestige of a hero, and popular 
tradition made him the great Semitic conqueror whose deeds 
and achievements served as oracles and are related in the 
collections of Omina (found at Nineveh and dating from the 
seventh century). It is in these suspect sources that we find 
the remark that Sargon had ‘* crossed the Sea of the West 
(Mediterranean) and made his arms to triumph for three 
years in the West, whither he sent his statue.’? Another 
version substitutes ‘‘ Sea of the East’? (Persian Gulf) and 
demonstrates the legendary character of the expedition on 
the Mediterranean. Still, it is likely enough that Sargon 
conquered Syria and Palestine, at least for a few years;' a 
tablet recently discovered at Tel-el-Amarna confirms the 
belief that Sargon penetrated as far as a country protected 
by forests and mountains (Amanus or Lebanon) and con- 
quered the region of Amurru.? 

This empire was defended and consolidated by Sargon’s 
heirs. His grandson, Manishtusu, equipped a fleet which 
crossed the Persian Gulf and surprised Elam by an unex- 
pected landing. His great-grandson, Naram-Sin (approxi- 
mately 2768-2712 B.c.), suppressed revolts among the moun- 
taineers of Lulubu (Stele of Naram-Sin in the Louvre). His 
name reappears on a stele north of Diarbekir in the heart of 
Anatolia. His glory reached the island of Cyprus, where he 
was invoked as a god. His soldiers made expeditions to the 
lands of Magan (which boasted seventeen kings and 90,000 
warriors) and of Melukha,*® both on the Persian Gulf. The 


1 Hall, XIX, pp. 187-8. 2 Clay, XXXIII, p. 96. 

* See XIII, vol. vii, pp. 142 7. Langdon locates Magan in the region 
called Gerra by classical authors (modern El-Hasa), and Melukha in the 
direction of the Oman coast. He proves that Albrecht’s thesis (XIII, vi, 
pp. 89 7#.) that Magan was Egypt, ruled by King Manum (=Menes), and 
Melukha Ethiopia is untenable both from the standpoint of a literal inter- 
pretation of the texts and from that of the relative chronology of the two 
countries. 


208 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


extraordinary development of architecture and arts proves 
that in all directions the dynasty of Agade had given an 
exceptional enlargement to its capital and the ancient realm 
of Shinar. Its sovereigns deserved the name ‘‘ Kings of the 
Four Regions of the World’? which Enlil had given them 
since the creation of the empire. 

It is, then, certain that a Semitic empire embracing the 
whole Fertile Crescent, Palestine included, and extending 
beyond its frontiers on every hand, existed in the days of 





Fic. 19.—Bas-RELIEF OF NARAM-SIN (IN EGYPTIANIZING STYLE, TO BE 
COMPARED WITH THE SUMERIAN STYLE OF Fic. 18). 


Sargon and Nardm-Sin in the first third of the third millen- 
nium. But we are still in ignorance as to nearly all the 
peoples who constituted the human element in this empire. 
From the texts we learn their names and sometimes their 
situations. As to their material remains, the scattered 
excavations have as yet brought to light hardly anything 
older than 2000 B.c. Neolithic stations have, however, been 
found at Gezer on the Palestinian plateau. There, as at 
Megiddo, the earliest known population lived in natural caves 
or rock-shelters, like the Troglodytes of the Arabian Desert, 
called by the Egyptians Iuntiu. But by this period the 


THE SEMITIC WORLD 209 


coastal ports later called Tyre, Sidon, and Byblos were 
centres of activity,' and inland megalithic monuments, 
dolmens, and menhirs (Kastern Palestine and the region of 
Moab) are found as well as city walls of great stones, which 
disclose the existence of other peoples, perhaps the Horites 
of Biblical tradition.? 

It is probable that the ports sheltered a Mediterranean 
population, and the acropoles were occupied by Semites. 
The mixture of the two stocks produced the Canaanite popu- 
lation, whose type differs, as we have seen, from that of the 
Beduins of pure Semitic race. The presence of a sedentary 
population cultivating wheat, vines and fruit-trees, breeding 
cattle, skilled in weaving flax and wool, acquainted with the 
ceramic and metallurgical industries, grouped in fortified 
citadels, possessing chiefs, and already divided by political 
rivalries and civil wars, is attested by the results of excava- 
tion, the cuneiform texts, and the slightly later evidence of 
the Egyptian inscriptions of the VIth Dynasty. The occupa- 
tion of the Amorite and Canaanite lands by Sargon and 
Naradm-Sin came to make closer the contact between these 
still backward peoples and the already old civilization of the 
Chaldzan Semites. For the next five centuries the Amorites 
and Canaanites were learning the arts of war and peace in a 
good school, and preparing reserves of energy for the future 
direction of the Semitic Empire. 


The access to the Mediterranean sought by Sargon and 
Naradm-Sin brought them into immediate relations with the 
Egyptians, who already frequented the port of Byblos and 
other havens on the Syrian coast. Commercial relations 
between Egypt and Chaldea had certainly existed for many 
centuries. This subject raises a host of problems: the 
Sumerian pottery with its geometric decoration and potters’ 
marks identical with that of Negadah and Abydos, the 
statuettes of naked goddesses, the use of mace-heads of the 

* Handcock, The Latest Light on Bible Lands (1918), chap. vi; Clay, 
XXXII, chap. iv; cf. the opinion of R. Dussaud: ‘‘ It may be recalled 
that the Tyrians of Herodotus’ time fixed the foundation of the temple of 
Melqart about 2700 B.c. The origin of the Phcenicians is a highly con- 
troversial problem, but their penetration into Syria about the beginning 
of the third millennium is beyond doubt ” (Scientia, 1918, p. 84). 

* Meyer, XXI § 356. 

14 


210 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


same type recurring at Lagash and Hierakonpolis, the em- 
ployment of cylinders serving as engraved seals in Sumerian, 
Elamite, and Egyptian countries, the ‘** prismatic ’’ facades, 
or those with buttresses forming vertical projections and 
recesses in Sumerian and Egyptian brick edifices; all these 
elements open up a vista of convergent probabilities to prove 
that there had been intereommunication, whether by the 
Red Sea or by caravan, between Sumer and Egypt in very 
remote antiquity. These probabilities have become certain- 
ties since Egyptian monuments have been found like the 
palette of Narmer (Fig. 7), on which the long necks of two 
fantastic animals intertwine as on the earliest Sumerian 
seals, or like the Gebel-el-Arak knife-handle on which a 
Sumerian divinity stands between two rampant lions 
(Fig. 20).* 

Since Sargon had arrived on the Mediterranean, closer 
commercial relations united the two countries, but Egypt 
had far surpassed Chaldza in the domain of institutions and 
arts. And so her influence came to be exercised upon the 
subjects of Sargon and Naram-Sin. We have proof thereof 
in the monuments of Sargon? and of Nardm-Sin,*® in which 
the sculpture in low relief testifies to such an advance over 
the Sumerian monuments (compare Figs. 18 and 19) that 
the sudden emergence of these masterpieces can only be 
interpreted as due to imitation of the Egyptian bas-reliefs ; 
evidence therefor is the care in the composition, the atti- 
tude of the figures, the sureness of the design, the sacrifice 
of detail in the interests of the total effect, and the delicacy 
of the modelling, conquests achieved at this epoch by the 
Memphite artists. 

Egyptian influence reappears also in some important 
innovations. Beginning with Naram-Sin, the kings of Shinar 
date their monuments by a new formula—the year after some 
historic event, such as a victory or the foundation of a 
monument. A like custom had been adopted in Egypt by 
Menes and the Thinite kings, and continued in vogue down 

* Langdon has enumerated all the arguments on this thesis in his very 
interesting article ‘‘ The Early Chronology of Sumer and Egypt and the 
Similarities in their Culture,’ XIII, vol. VIII, p. 133. 

* V. Scheil, Délégation en Perse, X, 5-8. 


* The Louvre Stele reproduced by ' angdon and Nardm-Sin’s bas-relief 
published by Scheil and Maspero in IV, vol. XV, p. 62 (our Fig. 19). 


THE SEMITIC WORLD 211 


to the Vth Dynasty, only to give place to the reckoning by 
the years of the Pharaoh’s reign. As Langdon remarks, 
Naram-Sin’s successors retained the formula of ‘‘ the year 
after ’’ without perfecting it. Such traditional respect would, 
perhaps, be most easily explicable in the case of a borrowing 
from a neighbour country, which would in this case be 





Fic. 20.—THE GEBEL-EL-ARAK KNIFE-HANDLE. (Louvre.) 
(After G. Bénédite.) 


Egypt. Beginning also with Sargon and Naram-Sin, “ the 
vicars of Enlil,’’ who hitherto were content to be the first 
priests of the god of empire, had themselves worshipped as 
gods during their lifetimes.’ We recognize in this deification 
of the sovereign not so much man’s vanity as a conception 
of empire. The kings of Shinar, becoming kings of diverse 
peoples either fundamentally unrelated to one another or 


* Thureau-Dangin, IV, vol. XIX, p. 185. 


212 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


separated for thousands of years, desired to achieve religious 
unity, the foundation of political unity, by setting up the 
cult of the sovereign among their subjects. The Pharaohs 
acted in the same way ; since the beginnings of the Egyptian 
monarchy they had been regarded as gods living upon earth. 
When the kingdom expanded, the worship of the sovereign 
was exacted from Nubians, Libyans, and Asiatics. 

The idea made its way through the world, and Sargon, 
Cyrus, Alexander, and Augustus will become ‘* gods of the 
empire ”’ in imitation of the Pharaohs. 


V 
EASTERN POLITICS IN THE TIME OF HAMMURABI 


The empire of Sargon and Naram-Sin was ephemeral, but 
what we can now call world politics outlived it. It marks 
the end of the relative isolation in which Egyptians and 
Chaldzans had lived down to about 2800 B.c. ; commerce and 
politics have now become collective interests to the East 
Mediterranean world. Every great social and political event 
in Mesopotamia or on the Nile has, directly or indirectly, its 
repercussion on the other side of the isthmus. We shall 
therefore pursue our studies, taking the two regions together. 

In Chaldea first a reaction of Sumerians broke out against 
the Semites. It explains the replacement of the dynasty of 
Akkad by the IVth Dynasty of Uruk (2648-2623 B.c.). The 
latter was succeeded by a foreign dynasty hailing from 
Gutium or Guti, a city and people of barbarian mountaineers 
situated on the foothills east of the Tigris. The advent of 
these barbarians, who held the land for 124 years (2622-2498 
B.c.), meant that a migrating horde of peoples was hovering 
to the north-east of Mesopotamia, and pushing before it 
unstable masses who poured down from the highlands to the 
valleys. The repercussion of this battering shock made itself 
felt among the Amorites. These for their part had already 
been drifting into the land of Akkad. They gave to a 
hitherto unknown city, Babylon, the strategic value of a 
bridgehead. From the land of Amurru the impulse was im- 
parted to the other horn of the crescent, Canaan and Pales- 
tine. The agitation there became so violent that a Pharaoh 


THE SEMITIC WORLD 213 


of the VIth Dynasty, Pepi I, had to mobilize his armies 
about 2500 B.c. to repel an invasion threatening Egypt. By 
a happy chance the biographical inscription of General Uni, 
who commanded the Egyptian troops, has come down to us, 
and reveals with piquant details this chapter in the history 
of Palestine. 

‘**A campaign was conducted by His Majesty (Pepi I) 
against the Asiatic Masters-of-the-Sands (Amu H eriu-sha). 
His Majesty collected an army of many dozens of thousands 
of men in the South in its entirety from Elephantine to 
Aphroditepolis, and in the North on both sides (of Egypt) 
and also among the Libyans of the land of Iertet, of the land 
of Zam, of the land of Uauat, of Imam, of Kau, and of the 
land of Temeh. And His Majesty sent me to put me at the 
head of this army. ... (Then I filled this office so well) 
that not a man was put (by mistake) in his neighbour’s place, 
that not a man took loaves or boots from those who were on 
the way, that not a man stole victuals in any town, that not 
a man stole a goat from the peoples. I led them by the Isle 
of the North, the Gate of I-[m]-hetep and the Quarter of 
Horus Nebmaat (King Snefru).’? These geographical terms 
denote the strong places, the ‘“‘ marches,”? which the Pharaohs 
had fortified by the IlIrd Dynasty in the isthmus to keep 
off raids by the Asiatics. Crossing the frontier, the army 
crushed its adversaries, who must have been quite close at 
hand—in fact, in Palestine. The description which follows 
enlightens us both as to the mode of warfare at this period 
and the organization of the Semitic peoples with whom the 
Kgyptians clashed—precious information which no Asiatic 
document of this date supplies. 

‘“‘This army came in peace; it routed the land of the 
Heriu-sha. This army came in peace; it crushed the land of 
the Heriu-sha. This army came in peace; it dismantled their 
strongholds. This army came in peace; it cut their figs and 
their raisins. This army came in peace; it launched fire 
among all their troops. This army came in peace; it 
slaughtered their regiments by many dozens of thousands. 
This army came in peace; it brought back very numerous 
prisoners.” But one campaign was not enough. Uni had 
‘five times over (probably for five years) to lead his 
troops to crush the land of the Heriu-sha as often as 


214 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


they conspired together.’’ At last Pepi discovered that 
the centre of the disturbance lay farther north than 
Palestine, beyond a mountainous promontory called by 
the Egyptians the Nose (i.e., Cape) of the Gazelle, which is 
probably the promontory of Carmel. To reach the Canaan- 
ites at such a distance from his base, Uni judiciously chose 
to take the sea route, either because Palestine was still held 
by the enemy, or to spare the army the exhausting march 
from the isthmus to Carmel.’ Just as the kings of Chaldea 
had equipped a fleet to land in Elam (p. 207), so Uni 
‘‘crossed the sea by ship with this army when a rising 
occurred among the mountaineers (of Asia) in the district 
of the Nose of the Gazelle. I put to shore at the back of the 
heights of the mountains north of the land of the Heriu-sha, 
and when the army had been brought to the heights I came, 
I captured them all, I slew every rebel among them.’”* 

The text says no more, but it tells us enough to assure us 
that this land was now occupied by numerous peoples com- 
manding regular troops and fortified strongholds and given 
to agriculture. Accordingly, Palestine was no longer in the 
hands of nomads, or, rather, the latter had long planted 
sedentary colonies there and had found very favourable 
conditions of life. How could this little agricultural country 
have become a menace to Egypt? Certainly not through 
any inexplicable ambition on the part of the petty Canaanite 
chiefs, far too weak to match themselves with a Pharaoh; 
but rather as the result of an irresistible pressure exerted 
upon them by emigrating hordes gravitating towards Egypt. 
The point where this pressure was exerted seems to have lain 
north of Carmel, near this Cape Gazelle, where Uni conducted 
his decisive campaign. When the turbulent masses were 
crushed they abandoned their march upon the south, and 
tranquillity returned for Egypt. 

But whence came all this tumult in the corridor that leads 
from the Euphrates to Egypt? It is highly probable that it 
was due to the recoil shock of the invasion of Chaldzea by the 
men of Gutium. The expedition of Uni under Pepi I may be 
dated about 2500 s.c. ; the barbarians had been in occupation 
of Chaldea for a century, and had had time to spread 


1 Meyer, XXII, § 266. 
2 Breasted, XVII, I, §§ 311 7#.; Sethe, Urkunden A.R., I, pp. 101-4. 


THE SEMITIC WORLD 215 


through the whole region of the crescent agents of disorder 
and pillage who scoffed even at the frontiers of Egypt. 


The barbarians of Gutium were only driven out or 
assimilated after a domination of 120 years. The (Vth) 
Dynasty of Uruk (2497-2475 B.c.) regained power ‘‘ by 
favour of a national reaction against the invaders. The 
best-known monuments of this epoch are those of a patesi 
of Lagash (Tello) Gudea, whose inscribed statues have pre- 
served admirable specimens of Sumerian art. Upon them 
Gudea enumerates his building operations and tells us that 
he imported timbers from the land of Ibla (Amanus), marble 
from the land mountain of Tidanu in the Amorite country, 
and copper from the environs of Ki-mash (Damascus); the 
mountains near the Persian Gulf, Melukha and Khaku, also 
furnished him with gold and wood. From these details we 
can judge of the wide scope of the commercial relations 
between different parts of the great empire of Sargon and 
Naradm-Sin. Perhaps the survival of some political authority 
must be admitted. Under the next dynasty (IIIrd Dynasty 
of Ur, 2474-2358 B.c.) Dungi, during his long reign of fifty- 
eight years, waged war in Palestine and round Damascus, 
attacked Elam and captured its capital, Susa.* So he styled 
himself ‘‘ king of the four regions of the world,’’ and received 
divine honours.” He therefore recreated the empire with all 
its traditions. 

Once again the populations of Asia are convulsed, without 
our being able to discern whether it is from the shock of 
migrations farther east or through the rivalry of ambitions 
of empire. Bur-Sin, Dungi’s successor, obtained (about 
2390 B.c.) the submission of Zariku, King of Assur (the first 
known to us). Gimil-Sin built a ‘** wall ’’ from the Tigris to 
the Euphrates to protect the northern frontier of Chaldza. 
It was all in vain; he and Ibi-Sin (2380-2358) were assailed 
on the south and on the east. First the Elamites invaded 
Mesopotamia and swept on into Palestine. One of their 
kings, Kutur, took the title of suzerain of the Amorites.? 
But the vanquished replied by a counter-attack. Finally an 
Amorite dynasty came into power at Isin, while a rival 


* Clay, XXXIII, pp. 96-7. * Scheil, IV, vol. XVIII, p. 64. 
® Clay, i.c., p.-97. 


216 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


Klamite dynasty arose at Larsa (2357-2095 sB.c.). This 
ambiguous situation was ended, as in the days of Sargon, by 
the victory of the Semitic Amorites, who founded the first 
dynasty of Babylon (2225-1926 s.c.) with Sumu-Abum. 

The triumph of the Amorites had far-reaching results. 
The secular rivalry between Sumer and Akkad was ended. 
Under this fresh flood of Semitic stocks the Sumerians were 
annihilated ; as a people they disappear from history. Lower 
Mesopotamia will henceforth be called by the name Akkad 
alone, or will be designated ‘‘ Babylonia,’’ after its new 
capital. Under the sixth king of the new dynasty, Hammu- 
rabi (2123-2081), the work is finished. The old rival cities 
are eclipsed by Babylon, which becomes the first city in the 
Near East for the number of its citizens, the beauty of its 
temples and palaces. A religious revolution marks the deep 
significance of the political change: Enlil, the old Sumerian 
god of Nippur, ceases to be a god of empire; his traditional 
prerogatives pass to Marduk, the god of Babylon. 

This empire recovered the frontiers of that of Sargon. 
The Amorites brought with them dominion over Canaan and 
the Damascus region, they conquered Akkad, Sumer, and 
Elam at the point of the sword. But material occupation 
of the country was not sufficient; it was necessary to estab- 
lish administrative unity based upon a close supervision on 
the part of the royal officials, and a code of laws applicable 
to each of the disparate parts of the empire. This was the 
work of Hammurabi, who is disclosed to us as a great con- 
queror and a great administrator. For the first time in the 
history of Mesopotamia the concerns, the ideas, and the plans 
of a sovereign are known to us from direct documents written 
at his dictation. These are fifty-five letters, inscribed on 
brick, addressed to a provincial governor and dealing with 
most varied subjects—maintenance of canals, a reform in 
the calendar, repression of theft, inquiries into the use of 
temple revenues, campaign directions to the troops and the 
fleet.” At the head of the administration there was, in truth, 
a chief who imparted a common impulse to all the regions. 

1 L. Legrain (Le temps des rois d’Ur, p. 6) also considers that the sub- 
stitution of Marduk for Enlil ‘‘is a substantial innovation which allows 
the strength of the new empire to be gauged.”’ 


* Now in the British Museum; published by King, The Letters of Ham- 
murabi; cf. ¥. Charles Jean, the Les Lettres de Hammurapi (19138). 


THE SEMITIC WORLD 217 


The impression given by the letters is produced also by 
the famous Code of Hammurabi, the first and only monument 
of its kind which the history of the Ancient East has pre- 
served to us.* It shows us a king and officials inspired by 
@ profound sense of their duties, anxious to justify the 
authority conferred upon Babylon by a vigilant attention, 
an expert mastery of the most complicated cases, and a 
sincere love of justice and legality. Babylonia had become 
a composite human society. The fusion of elements civilized 
long ago with the Amorite newcomers, not so schooled in the 
complex needs of an organized State, provoked there a host 
of conflicts or raised endless problems as to the legal status 
of the various social classes, rights in real and personal 
property and agricultural or commercial agreements. The 
ancient laws, to which each race was accustomed, had to be 
adapted to the new circumstances and co-ordinated into an 
imperial code. A like problem has had to be faced at all 
periods after the establishment in a land of ancient culture 
of new populations side by side with the former occupants. 
It will be enough to cite the Lex Gundobada, which, in a 
strikingly analogous case, was to regulate the respective 
positions of the conquered Gallo-Romans and the invading 
Burgundians. 

Let us, however, note that the Law of Hammurabi did 
not provide for a special treatment of each of the peoples 
of the empire. It addressed itself to a unified society, as if 
all the heterogeneous elements had been radically submerged 
by the Semitic flood. In that the code was truly an instru- 
ment of pacification and concord. Hammurabi, faithful to 
the traditions of Sargon, further lays claim to divine inspira- 
tion: on the summit of the diorite stele on which the laws 
are engraved, the Sun-god, seated, is dictating to Hammu- 
rabi, standing in a deferential attitude, the text of the divine 
laws which the king will transmit to his subjects. In the 
prologue to the code the king says that he had been called 
by the gods Anu and Bel “to make justice prevail in the 
land, to destroy the wicked and the perverse, and to prevent 


* The block of diorite (now in the Louvre) which bears the text of the 
Code was discovered at Susa (Elam) by J. de Morgan in 1901, and 
deciphered and translated by Father V. Scheil. Popular editions have been 
published by Leroux (1904). 


218 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


the strong from oppressing the weak.’’ Thereby is the divine 
right of the monarchy asserted; as in Egypt, so in Baby- 
lonia the royal law was the word of God. 


Was Hammurabi’s empire at the beginning of the twenty- 
first century in relation with Egypt? No document from the 
Babylonian or Egyptian chancellories has come down to us 
to warrant an affirmative answer. But it is inconceivable 
that the prosperity of Babylonia should not have found 
expression in a great current of trade directed towards the 
foreign centres of industry and commerce; that is to say, in 
the first place to the Egyptian Delta. The north coast of 
Syria at this period was certainly under the hegemony of 
the Amorites; on the south coast the influence of Egypt had 
not been maintained after the campaign of Pepi I, since the 
Memphite dynasties had come to shipwreck after the long 
reign of Pepi II in social and political turmoil. Memphis had 
been replaced by Heracleopolis as capital (IXth and Xth 
Dynasties, 2360-2160 B.c.), and South Egypt, under the 
leadership of the princes of Thebes, was already separating 
herself from the king and preparing a dynastic revolution. 
In this state of extreme weakness the kings of Heracleopolis 
had still to face threats of invasion on the side of Asia. They 
did not come from regular armies, but from pillagers, stray 
nomads, or tribes on the march who, to quote the phrase of 
a recently published Egyptian text, ‘** tried to come down 
into Egypt to beg for water after their wont and to give 
drink to their flocks.’’* 

According to another literary pamphlet, attributed to 
the father of King Merikara (of the [Xth Heracleopolitan 
Dynasty), Palestine was greatly disturbed, perhaps by the 
recoil of the displacement of tribes which had followed the 
Amorite invasion of Babylonia. ‘* Behold’’ (says the king 
to his son) ‘*‘ the wretched Asiatic (Amu); difficult is the 
land where he is, by reason of its waters, its numerous trees, 
and its mountains, which make the roads burdensome. As 
for him (the Asiatic), he can never abide in one place, his 
legs are ever in motion, and he is always fighting since the 
days of Horus. He conquers nothing, but neither is he con- 
quered. . .. Since I have existed I have caused the Delta 


1 St. Petersburg Papyrus, translated by Gardiner in XIII, vol. I, p. 105. 


THE SEMITIC WORLD 219 


to crush the Asiatics, I have carried off captive the in- 
habitants (of their land), I have raided their flocks. The 
Amu is an abomination to Egypt. Still do not disquiet 
thyself on his account ...he may indeed plunder an 
isolated encampment, but he will never attack a populous 
town.’’ The conclusion is that it is necessary to consolidate 
the old forts and to build new ones to guard the isthmus 
routes and to protect the Delta, ‘* for no ill is ever wrought 
against a well-fortified city.’”? 

This document, which casts such a piquant light upon the 
Asiatic populations bordering upon the isthmus, betrays a 
justifiable anxiety. In fact, other texts which describe the 
troubled state of the Delta under the Heracleopolitan kings 
frankly confess that ‘‘ the Asiatics (Settiu) have invaded the 
fastnesses of the Delta, that they occupy the land and the 
workshops, and know now all the secrets of the Egyptian 
trades and industries.’’? Despite the reservations which 
Adolf Erman regards as necessary in respect of the im- 
portance which is to be attached to these recitals, it is 
undeniable that the Asiatics penetrated into the Delta at 
this epoch. Attracted, perhaps, by the bait of easy and 
remunerative gains, the tribes of nomadic Semites from the 
isthmus and Palestine made their way into a disorganized 
country and stayed there till the day when the Theban 
Pharaohs had restored the Egyptian monarchy and cleansed 
her frontiers. It does not look as if this temporary occupa- 
tion had had the character of an armed expedition. The 
Biblical tradition describing Abraham and his family quitting 
the town of Ur of the Chaldees, proceeding up the Euphrates 
by short stages, then descending by the Orontes and Jordan 
as far as Shechem, pushing on to Egypt to escape the 
famine, and then finally returning to Hebron, apparently 
accurately traces these tribal movements in the days of a 
King Amraphel, who is, perhaps, Hammurabi.* 


Such was the state of the Orient round about 2000 B.c. 
The Egyptian monarchy had just suffered an eclipse of power 
and influence. The Semitic empire, by the natural play of 

* St. Petersburg Papyrus, 116; Gardiner, XIII, vol. I, pp. 2 7. 


2 Gardiner, Admonttions, 4, 5-9. 
$ Gen. xii f.; cf. Handcock, The Latest Light on Bible Lands, chap. ii. 


220 FROM CLANS TO KINGDOMS 


compensating forces, seemed all the more solid and formid- 
able to its neighbours. Other invasions are coming to im- 
peril the very existence of Babylonia, while Egypt, on the 
other hand, will regain fresh strength with a restored 
monarchy. The question of the mutual position of the two 
great Oriental monarchies will then arise; hitherto they have 
communicated by means of caravans and merchant ships, 
but they have not yet met as open rivals for the empire of 
the East. 


PART III 
THE FIRST EMPIRES OF THE ORIENT 


CHAPTER I 


THE IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS AND THE 
BARBARIAN EMPIRE OF THE HYKSOS 


TuE social, political, and religious crisis which had reduced 
the Egypt of the Heracleopolitan dynasties to an alarming 
degree of anarchy, weakness, and poverty (from 2360 to 
2160 B.c.), was one of those maladies of adolescence from 
which a youthful body rises with augmented vigour. About 
2160 B.c. authority was once more established in the central 
region of the South Kingdom in the hands of the princes 
of Thebes, Antef and Mentuhetep, who founded the XIth 
Dynasty (2160-2000 B.c.). Their successors, Amenemhat and 
Senusert of the XIIth Dynasty (2000-1788 B.c.) inherited an 
Egypt that had regained unity, peace, and prosperity. This 
is the period of the Middle Kingdom, or Theban Empire 
(XIth to XIIIth Dynasties, roughly 2160 to 1660 B.c.), one 
of the most splendid epochs in Egyptian history. We shall 
relate in our book on the Nile and Egyptian Civilization how 
these kings rank among the most intelligent and the most 
sensible of their duties; they were able to heal the sores left 
by the social revolution. The old monarchy, sanctified by 
its halo of magic, its supernatural powers, and its childish 
superstitions, is transformed into an organism in which the 
practices of sorcery and theocratic theories are of less im- 
portance than the conceptions of State socialism. Already 
the king, without renouncing his title as an autocratic god, 
fulfils his functions as the man par eacellence; he aims at 
being an active shepherd of his people, just and inspired by 
goodwill. Under his leadership the Egyptian people awakes 
to political and social life, it becomes conscious of its per- 
sonality. This fosters that blossoming of a most remarkable 
221 


222 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


philosophical and popular literature which gives us an insight 
into the meditations of sages on the revolutions in progress, 
and the imagination of the artists and the people excited by 
the new days. Confronting foreigners an Egyptian experiences 
the feeling of social, political, and intellectual superiority ; 
pride in being a subject of Pharaoh makes way for the idea 
of the Egyptian fatherland. 

The kings of the XIIth Dynasty had at their disposal 
the forces of a great centralized State—well-filled coffers, an 
army reorganized into national regiments and Libyan and 
Nubian mercenaries. Agriculture is more active than ever, 
since the peasants are no longer serfs and have received the 
status of tenants. The crafts are free, since the royal 
administration, the temples, and the nobles no longer appro- 
priate the industries to their own use. Hence the labour of 
peasants and workmen yields a magnificent return, to which 
the monuments, the works of art, and the jewellery of this 
epoch bear witness. For the Pharaohs the consequence was 
the resumption on a broader basis of the policy of external 
expansion, at once to provide the people with raw materials 
and to create an outlet to foreign markets for the products 
of the fields and factories. The land, rich and strong, pro- 
ceeds to expand in Africa and become a ‘‘ Greater Egypt.” 


I 
THE GREATEST Ecypt 


In the Nile valley the Pharaohs of the XIIth Dynasty 
had no great difficulty in regaining and developing the pre- 
dominant position which those of the Old Kingdom had 
already enjoyed. There they had to deal with the Libyans 
and the Nubians. 

The relations with the Libyans during the Heracleopolitan 
period are obscure. It is, however, known that the sovereigns 
of Heracleopolis had employed Libyan mercenaries against 
their rivals the princes of Thebes, and the latter, especially 
Mentuhetep, counted the Libyans among the enemies whom 
they had crushed. That is enough to allow us to infer that 
Libya was then politically dependent on the kingdom of 
Lower Egypt, as her geographical situation requires. Under 


IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS 223 


the XIIth Dynasty the relations of the Libyans with Egypt 
were passed over in silence; no doubt the energetic Theban 
sovereigns, who gave to the reunited realm a fresh access of 
glory and power, were in a position to keep their western 
frontier in order. 

Nubia, more turbulent, pursued its agitated history. In 
the troubled times of the Heracleopolitans it, like the Theban 
region, seems to have freed itself from the obedience to the 
Pharaohs to place itself under the rule of emancipated 
officials who arrogated to themselves the title of king. And 
so it remained until the Thebans of the XIth Dynasty 
reduced it once more to allegiance. The monarchs of the 
XIIth Dynasty had to restore the system of safeguards 
devised by their predecessors and relaxed during the period 
of troubles. Amenemhat I and Senusert I went south as far 
as the Second Cataract and fortified the entries to the lateral 
valleys, especially that of the Kuban, which led to the gold 
mines of Nubia. Then Senusert III (1887-1850 s.c.) barred 
the river above the Second Cataract by the fortresses of 
Semneh and Kummeh, themselves protected by outworks in 
the Island of Uronarti—‘‘ that which repels the Troglodytes 
(Iuntiu).’** Egyptian garrisons were installed much farther 
up stream at the Third Cataract, where a cemetery belonging 
to Egyptian governors of the Sudan has been exhumed.’ It 
seems that at this juncture the Egyptians found new peoples 
in Nubia; at least, we see the name of the inhabitants of 
Kash Kush (Ethiopia)* appearing beside those previously 
known, to designate the warlike occupants of the land. 

Thereafter the Egyptians, supported by their fortresses, 
were able to exercise a restraint upon these barely civilized 
hordes and to administer the country as an Egyptian colony. 
Preoccupied with preventing the invasion of the valley by 
the Negro tribes not yet subdued, Senusert III set up stele 
in the eighth and sixteenth years of his reign ‘‘ to forbid any 
Nubian (Nehesi) crossing the frontier save for purposes of 
trade.’** Even so they were not allowed to come in their 
own boats, but for greater security were obliged to make use 


* Gardiner has published a papyrus which gives a list of twelve Egyptian 
fortresses in Nubia (XIII, vol. III, p. 184). 

2 XIII. 

* XII, vol. XLV, p. 184. * Lepsius, Denkmailer, II, 151. 


224 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


Medirverranean 


Lamietha 


DY 8 basi 
A OY Tila A mu 
Tehenu ; 


ehelogohs 

Ser pPhls ® it }- 
7p \ Asher Heriu-sha cette 
Mashauasha AphpPditeoeli 
ye wg 


Mentiu 
e Serabitel Hhadem 
Fayu 7 sa aphara 


freraclegp © 
Magna 


Liephantine eAssouan 
fst \Coloract 


Dodecaschcent 


Ona Calaracd” 
® Numaeh 


K ufsh 


Jombos!e Trad Caflaract 
ACTA 


Itt Colarach x Sth Cataract 
b; ara 





Map IV.—THE GREATEST EGypT (MIDDLE AND NEW KINGDOMS). 


IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS 225 


of Egyptian vessels. Thanks to these measures, domina- 
tion over Nubia was once more assured for many years to 
come, and the Pharaohs had themselves worshipped in temples 
in the black countries as in Sinai, in order thus to consecrate 
the definite occupation of the country and to establish a re- 
ligious bond between the protecting people and the protected. 
Nevertheless, the contempt felt by the Egyptian citizen for 
such barbarians made itself manifest in the historical texts; 
in connection with the Ethiopians we see an insulting epithet 
—the ‘‘ wretched (hes) land of Kush ’’'—appearing, and it 
will henceforth regularly accompany the names of the 
Pharaohs’ enemies. 

On the eastern bank of the Nile the Arabian Desert, 
inhabited by the Troglodytes, the guardians of the Red Sea 
routes, was once more much frequented by the Egyptians. 
By the Red Sea men went to the land of Punt and Arabia 
and, perchance, even to the Persian Gulf in search of the 
spices, aromatic plants, and incense of Arabia, and the 
diverse products of Chaldzan industry. Under the Old 
Kingdom the Egyptian boats had set sail from the Gulf of 
Suez. From the Middle Kingdom a route, already traversed 
in the prehistoric epoch and then abandoned, was reopened 
to caravan traffic; it starts from Coptos to come out at Sawu, 
near Qoseir by the Wady Hammamat.” It was much more 
direct, and saved the cargoes landed at Sawu a long détour 
on the backs of men and asses, and brought them not into 
the Delta at the northern extremity of the kingdom, but to 
Coptos in the centre of the Theban monarchy. Towards the 
end of the XIth Dynasty, Mentuhetep V sent an expedition 
of 10,000 men to pacify the Troglodytes, to exploit the stone 
quarries, and to reopen the sea route; thereafter the expedi- 
tions were often repeated.’ Those which made the land of 
Punt their goal show how the taste for maritime expeditions, 
the love of fruitful commercial exploration, and the spirit of 
adventure were growing up among the Egyptians. 

It is unlikely that long distance trade on the Red Sea was 
a@ private undertaking. The ships belonged to the Pharaoh, 
and the captains of the expeditions were usually ‘‘ treasurers 

* XII, vol. XLV, Pl. VIII (a); see also XVII, I, 657. 


2 P. Montet, ‘‘ Les inscriptions de 1O. Hammamat ” in II (Mémoires). 


* XXII, §§ 278, 288. 
15 


226 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


of the god ’’—1.e., of the king of the South—accompanied by 
royal troops. Perhaps this was only due to economic causes ; 
the expenses of organization would exceed the means of 
individuals, and could only be assured by the king. How- 
ever, other considerations may be emphasized: foreign trade 
deeply concerns the prestige and well-being of a nation, and 
so its activity must be closely supervised by the constituted 
authority. The English, French, and other modern peoples 
were acquainted with the system of ‘‘ royal and privileged 
companies ”’ for the exploitation of the Indies and Africa— 
official as much as private enterprises, in which the king’s 
fleet and army lent armed aid to the merchant vessels and 
the traders from the counting-houses. On the other hand, 
it seems that, long before the Phoenicians, who jealously 
guarded the secret of the distant lands where they trafficked, 
the Pharaohs had reserved for themselves these profitable 
voyages to the countries of incense, spices, and precious 
woods, keeping their subjects in ignorance of any precise 
data as to the origin of these treasures, which they needed 
for purposes of cult. Was that a religious monopoly? Or 
had the tradition of a primitive cradle-land whence the 
Egyptians derived their gods, Horus, Hathor, Bes, and 
perhaps the first elements of civilization, never been inter- 
rupted? In any case, popular imagination was fascinated by 
this land of Punt, which must be located at the mouth of the 
Red Sea, on the coasts of Yemen and Somaliland. 

A tale describes an island, perhaps Socotra (known later 
also to the Greeks), inhabited by a giant serpent and his 
family composed of seventy-five serpents. He is the king 
of the land of Punt. He lives midst gold and riches, his 
whole body is incrusted with gold and lapis, the island is a 
marvellous garden: figs, magnificent raisins, fruits, grains, 
vegetables to satiety, fish, fowls; there is naught which is 
not to be found there. And so the name of this region is the 
‘© Isle of Provisions ’’ (Kau), and its king has no need of the 
riches of Egypt, which are as naught beside the products of 
his own land. 

To this enchanted isle no one penetrates save by hazard 
of storms; that was the fortune of an Egyptian ship driven 
by the wind towards these coasts. The whole crew perished 
save for the hero of the tale, whom the serpent-king welcomes 


IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS 227 


with cordiality and soon sends back to Egypt loaded with 
wondrous presents.‘ On the departure of the ship, the 
island, transformed into waves, disappears from the visible 
world, but remained only the more vividly in the memory of 
the shipwrecked mariner. This tale, many characteristic 
features of which reappear in the adventure of Ulysses in 
the island of the Pheacians and the adventures of Sindbad 
the Sailor,” shows how keenly sailors’ stories interested the 
Egyptians of this epoch. The world of marvels and distant 
adventure was opened to them and enticed them far beyond 
the familiar sites of the valley. 


And the mines of Sinai were also reached by land as well 
as by sea. Just as under the Old Kingdom, the Pharaohs 
regarded copper ore and precious stones as the properties of 
the Crown, which they worked by means of miners, settled 
in the country, and guarded and protected against the 
attacks of nomads by royal troops. The mining operations 
were extended to take in another site, the Serabit-el-Khadem, 
north of the Wady Maghara. From time to time expeditions 
under the command of officers of high rank went to collect 
the products of ‘‘the sovereign’s mines,’ and brought 
back the *‘ galleon’’ to a safe place, not without having 
**crushed’’ some fractions of the Troglodytes (Iuntiu), 
Semitic nomads (Mentiu), and ‘inhabitants of the sands ”’ 
(Heriu-sha).*. The Pharaohs of the XIth and XIIth 
Dynasties frequently commemorate these brief and violent 
expeditions, some of which may have involved contact with 
the Asiatics of Palestine. In fact, on some monuments 
carved in the new “‘ mine of the sovereign ’’—that of Serabit- 
el-Khadem—we find mention of “ Asiatics ”’ (Amu) among 
the workers, and of the names of two sheiks (heqa) of 
Lotanu’ among the visitors to the temple raised by the 
Pharaohs to Hathor in the mining district.2 The name 
Lotanu corresponds to the Biblical Lotan, and is sometimes 


* Maspero, Contes populaires, iv, 104-114: ‘‘ The Shipwrecked Mariner.” 

* Golinischeff in IV, vol. XXVIII, pp. 73-112; cf. XXVIII, 242 ff. 

* The term occurs in the tale of ‘‘ The Shipwrecked Mariner ” (2.¢., p.-104). 

* R. Weill, ‘‘ L’>Asie dans les textes de l’Ancien et du Moyen Empire ’”’ in 
X, vol, VIII, 199 7#. 

* Weill, X, vol. IX, 166 7. 


228 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


applied to Palestine, sometimes to North Syria, when it is 
accompanied with a qualification—‘* Upper Lotanu.’’? 


Political and commercial intercourse with the Asiatics 
was maintained by more direct routes—the sea way, which 
carried the ships of Egypt and Byblos from the Delta to the 
ports of the future Pheenicia, especially to Byblos, where 
timber from Lebanon and all the products of the hinterland 
were loaded, and the caravan road through Gaza and the 
coast of Palestine. We have seen above (p. 218) that the 
nomads of Syria and Palestine were invincibly attracted by 
Egypt, and that the troubled times of the Heracleopolitan 
dynasties had given them the opportunity to plunder the 
Delta. The Theban kings quickly set these matters in order. 
A prophecy foretold that a king, Ameni, should come from 
the South to slay the Asiatics, and ‘*‘ to build the Regent’s 
Wall (inb heqa) to prevent the Asiatics for the future 
from coming down into Egypt, whither they are wont to 
come to beg for water to give drink to their flocks.’’? The 
prophecy—edited after the event—refers to Amenemhat I, 
who, as another papyrus informs us, constructed ‘‘ the 
Regent’s Wall to repulse the Asiatics (Settiu) and to crush 
the nomads who traverse the sands (nemiu-sha).’’? Thus 
the ** Gate of the East,’’ fortified since the I[Ird Dynasty, 
was restored; defence works were organized as on the 
Nubian frontier to resist all assaults. No trace of this wall 
has been discovered, but its place must of necessity have 
been at the mouth of the Wady Tumilat,* the only way of 
access, thirty-one miles long, across the dismal desert of 
sands which separates the Nile from Palestine. 

A popular tale, The Adventures of Sinuhet,’? dating from 
this period gives a very vivid picture of the conditions under 


* Cf. Sethe, Urk., IV, 907 where the text distinguishes between Lower 
(Ar¢) and Upper (7?) Lotanu. 

* Gardiner, St. Petersburg Papyrus, 1116, B recto 11, 66 ff. in XIII, 
I, 105. 

3 Berlin Papyrus (Sinuhet), 1, 17. 

“R. Weill, in X, 8, 191, 210; Gardiner, XIII, I, 106; G. Maspero, 
Contes populaires, iv, 77. 

®° The quotations are taken from the translation given by Maspero, 
op. cit., pp. 79 ff., rectified by that of Gardiner, ‘‘ Notes on the Story of 
Sinuhe ” in IV, vols. XXXII-XXXIV, p. 386. 


IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS 229 


which the journey from Egypt to Palestine would be made. 
The hero of the tale is a prince of the royal family, who leaves 
the Court secretly on the death of Amenemhat I (1981 B.c.) 
for fear of being implicated in a plot hatched against Senu- 
sert I, the son and successor of the late king. Only with 
much difficulty and by night could Sinuhet cross the Regent’s 
Wall; for, he says, ** I was afraid of being seen by the sentry 
who was on guard on the wall. I set out at night, and the 
next day at dawn I reached Peten and rested at the Isle of 
Kamuer. Then, thirst! it fell upon me and assailed me; 
faintness seized me, there was a rattling in my throat, and I 
was already saying to myself, ‘It is the taste of death,’ when 
I revived my heart and pulled myself together. I heard the 
distant lowing of a herd, and I beheld the Asiatics (Settiu). 
One of their sheiks (heqa) who had dwelt in Egypt recognized 
me: lo! he gave me water and had milk boiled for me. Then 
I went with him unto his tribe, and they showed me the 
kindness of handing me on from country to country. I set 
out thus for Byblos (Keben),' I reached the Qedem (Orient), 
and I dwelt there for a year and a half. There Enshi, son of 
Amu, who is the sheik (heqa) of Upper Lotanu, sent to me 
and said: * Thou shall’st be well with me; for there thou wilt 
hear the speech of Egypt.’ He said that because he knew 
who I was, and word of my reputation had reached him ; 
some Egyptians who were in the country with me had given 
him an account of me.’’ 

The Regent of Lotanu had heard of the death of Amenem- 
hat, and politely said to the refugee: ‘* What will become of 
this land of Egypt without that beneficent god, the fear of 
whom is spread abroad among the foreign nations?’’ Sinu- 
het replies by a dithyrambic eulogy of Senusert, and hints to 
his host: ‘‘ The Pharaoh conquers the lands of the south 
(Nubia), but covets not the lands of the north (Asia). Never- 
theless, if he send hither an expedition, may it be that he 
know thy name of good report and that no slanders concern- 
ing thee come to the ears of His Majesty. For he ceases not 
to do good to the land which is subject unto him.”? The 
sheik replies: ‘In sooth, Egypt is happy since it knows the 


* The identification of the name with Byblos, at first disputed, now 
seems irrefutable (cf. XXVIII, 219 7.; Gardiner, ‘‘ Notes,’’ p. 21) 


230 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


verdure of its prince! As for thee, since thou art here, abide 
thou here with me and I will do thee good.”’ 

The narrative which follows is a document of unique 
interest; it gives a picture of this region east of Byblos, 
which must correspond to the Orontes Valley or the oasis of 
Damascus, such as no Asiatic document allows us to draw. 
** The sheik of the Lotanu gave me his daughter in marriage 
and granted me the boon of choosing for myself in his land 
from the best which he possessed on the frontier of a neigh- 
bouring country. It is excellent soil; Aia is its name. There 
wax figs and raisins, wine is in greater abundance than water, 
honey is plentiful, oil in great quantity, and all sorts of fruits 
grow on the trees. There is barley and wheat without stint, 
and every kind of cattle.’ And great privileges were con- 
ferred upon me, since the prince came on my behalf and 
installed me as prince over a tribe of the best in his land. I 
had daily bread and wine for each day, boiled meat and fowl 
for roast, and, besides, the game of the country, which was 
caught for me, or presented to me, or which my hunting 
dogs brought home. Many dishes were prepared for me, and 
milk in every way. 

‘“‘I spent many years there; my children became strong, 
each the master of his tribe. The messengers coming down 
to the north or going up to the south towards Egypt 
hastened to visit me, for I entertained all comers well. . . . 
The Settiu, who were setting out on a long march to fight 
and overcome foreign princes, their expeditions I guided; 
for this sheik of Lotanu made me general over his soldiers 
for many years.... Every country against which I 
marched, when I fell upon it, trembled in its pastures to 
the edges of its wells; I took its cattle, I made captive its 
vassals, and I carried off their slaves, I slew its men. By 
my sword, by my bow, by my marches, by my well-conceived 
strategems I won the heart of my prince, and he loved me 
when he became acquainted with my valour. He made me 
the chief of his children when he beheld the verdure of my 
ara” 

This lively recital is the earliest known description of the 


* It has been questioned whether this attractive description could really 
apply to Syria; see, however, the similar picture of Zahi given by the 
Annals of Thothmes III, five hundred years later (p. 275 below). 


IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS 2381 


pastoral and warlike life of the tribes of Lotanu. It gives 
us an idea of their political organization ; for while Palestine 
and the Phoenician coast were dotted with ports and small 
fenced cities forming as many principalities or miniature 
kingdoms, the hinterland, Lebanon and the Damascus region, 
were the territories of tribes (whit), some composed of agri- 
culturalists, others of nomads, under the governance of petty 
clan chiefs subject to a suzerain, the sheik of Upper Lotanu. 
As Maspero has noted,' the names of the locality and the 
country—Aia and Lotanu—transcribe Biblical names, the 
patronymics at once of individuals, tribes, and countries: 
Aiah, nephew of Lotan (Gen. xxxvi. 24). The manners of 
these tribesmen were already those which the eastern stories 
ascribe to the Arabs of the great tent. Here is a knightly 
episode which might have found a place in the Arabian 
Nights. 3 

**A brave of Lotanu came to challenge me in my 
tent. ... He declared that he laid claim to my cattle 
at the instigation of his tribe... . 

**I spent the night in plying my bow, in sharpening my 
dagger, in burnishing my arms. At dawn the land of Lotanu 
hastened to the scene. ... All hearts were afire for me, 
men and women uttered cries, every heart was anxious for 
me on my behalf, and the people said: ‘Is there in truth 
another strong enough to fight against him ?’ 

** He (the challenger) took his shield, his axe, his sheaf of 
javelins. When I had caused him to spend his weapons in 
vain and had warded off his darts so skilfully that they 
struck the earth without one of them falling near another, 
he rushed upon me. Then I loosed my bow upon him, and 
when my dart lodged in his neck he cried out and fell upon 
his nose. I finished him off with his own axe. I uttered 
my shout of victory over his back, and all the Asiatics cried 
aloud in delight. . . . And this sheik Enshi, son of Amu, 
embraced me, and I took possession of the goods of the 
defeated champion. What he would have done to me, that 
did I to him: I seized his cattle, I took what he had in his 
tent, I plundered his douar, I enriched my treasury, and I 
increased the number of my cattle.” 

Growing old, Sinuhet solicited and obtained permission 


1 Contes, 78. 


232 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


from Senusert I to return to Egypt and take up his place at 
the Court once more. 

Then he left his property in Aia to his children. ‘‘ My 
eldest son was chief of my tribe just as if my tribe and all 
my goods belonged to him—my serfs, all my cattle, all my 
plantations, all my date-trees.’’ Then he set out with some 
sheiks of the land of Qedem and of the land of the Fenkhu,? 
who had grown up in the love of Pharaoh; for ‘* Lotanw is 
thine like thy dogs.’ His Majesty kept a warm welcome for 
the wanderer, but one not untouched with a certain irony : 
** Here you are, then, come back after visiting foreign lands 
and traversing the deserts;’? and, turning to the royal 
children and the queen, the king said: ‘‘ There is Sinuhet 
returning (accoutred) like an Amw and like a child of 
Settiu!’? The queen and the children burst into laughter, 
and ‘* sheik ’’? Sinuhet received his pardon. 

Upper Lotanu, which corresponds to Ccele Syria, had 
then regular relations with Egypt about the middle of the 
reign of Senusert I (1950 B.c.). Without being occupied 
by a military force, it was already colonized by Egyptian 
refugees and was constantly traversed by royal messengers, 
travellers, and merchants. Even the Egyptian language was 
spoken there. The respect which Pharaoh inspired in the 
region was such that Sinuhet said, no doubt by hyperbole: 
** Lotanu is as devoted to him as are his dogs.’? The Egyp- 
tians, for their part, maintained a proper aloofness befitting 
the differences in culture, wealth, and strength which sub- 
sisted between the little towns of Syria, or the tribes that 
dwelt beneath their tents, and the great State of Egypt. The 
Asiatics appeared uncouth and dirty barbarians to the 
nobles of Pharaoh’s Court. The artisans and labourers of 
Egypt, too, despised the Palestinian villagers, or failed to 
appreciate the attractions of nomadic life. Sinuhet admits 

* Sethe has sought to prove that Fenkhu was the old name from which 
poivikes was derived and meant Pheenicia; the name recurs in Egyptian 
texts of the Vth Dynasty (XVI, vols. 45, 85, 130). This seductive inter- 
pretation is rejected by the majority of Egyptologists (IV, vol. 33, 18; 
cf. Hall, XIX, 159) on philological grounds, However, Sethe has returned 
to his argument fortified with fresh grounds (Mitt. Vorderasiat. Ges., 
1916, p. 305-319), and maintains that fenkhu originally denoted a Syrian 
tribe, was then extended to the foreign elements introduced into Syria 


and came from the same stem as ¢olmé. 
* Maspero, Contes, pp. 101-2. 


IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS 238 


this. ‘* No Asiatic archer (Pedti) would willingly associate 
with a fellah of the Delta; for how can a cane-brake be 
transplanted to a mountain?’’! Nevertheless, these racial 
contrasts and oppositions were not incompatible with 
amicable relations. The Egyptians would have been glad 
to become the instructors of the people of Palestine and 
Syria,” to make their land an outpost of Egypt against 
the East. 


We have seen the important part allotted to Byblos in 
the maritime intercourse between Egypt and Syria at the 
time of the Old Kingdom. In the present state of our know- 
ledge it is impossible to tell whether the ports of the north 
coast were already in the hands of the enigmatical 
Phoenicians,’ but the ports existed with a population of bold 
navigators. The papyrus of the Admonitions, which revives 
the picture of the troubles of Heracleopolitan Egypt, presents 
the trade in wood and oils which the Egyptians imported 
from the ports of Syria as extending also to the isles and the 
land of the Keftiu, the Cilicians and the Cretans. The nobles 
of Phoenicia and Crete are said to have adopted the practice 
of mummification in imitation of the Egyptians, applying 
to their own funeral uses the products for which the Nile- 
dwellers displayed such avidity for the cult of their own 
dead.* The Egyptian texts are vague enough about the 
relations with the peoples of the Mediterranean islands; an 
official of Mentuhetep VI (about 2010 B.c.), however, boasts 
of having conquered the Haunebu. Another, who lived in 
the reign of Senusert I (about 1950), says that he registers 
with his pen matters concerning the Haunebu.® The testi- 
mony of archeology is more precise. At Illahun in the 
funerary town of Sesostris II, and at Abydos (same epoch), 
fragments of Creto-A‘gean pottery, and, above all, a mag- 
nificent vase of the type termed Kamares, have been dis- 


1 Contes, p. 86. In the eyes of the Egyptians, the Asiatics were 
mountaineers (khastiu); let us not forget that Lebanon and the Taurus 
reach altitudes of 9,000 and 12,000 feet. 

* The epithet “‘ miserable ks”? was not yet applied to the Asiatics, save 
in the papyrus quoted above, p. 218. 

3 Hall, XIX, 158. 

* Gardiner, The Admonitions of an Egyptian Sage, 32. 

5 XXII, §§ 228, 278. 


234 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


covered. Its presence in a tomb at Abydos contemporary 
with Amenemhat IIT (about 1830 z.c.) allows us to synchro- 
nize with the Middle Kingdom in Egypt the corresponding 
period of the Minoan civilization (Middle Minoan IT).* 
Towards the end of the XIIth Dynasty, and still more under 
the XIIIth and succeeding dynasties, seals in the shape of 
a scarab engraved on the flat face, with a name bordered by 
spirals, become increasingly common in Egypt; this spiral 
motive is characteristic of the Creto-Aigean workshops. 

Thus from the Asiatic coasts to the islands of the Medi- 
terranean extended a zone of Egyptian influence, where 
policy advanced along the paths opened up by trade. But 
events of capital importance came to arrest the pacific pene- 
tration of the Egyptians into Asia and to reverse completely 
for several centuries the traditional réles of the two parts of 
the Oriental world. 


IT 


THE INVASIONS OF THE KASSITES AND THE HItrTITES 
IN MESOPOTAMIA 


The reign of Hammurabi had consecrated the victory of 
the Semites over all the other populations known in Hither 
Asia in the crescent of fertile lands limited on the north by 
the plateau of Anatolia and on the east by the table-land 
of Iran. The time was come when huge masses of half- 
barbarous peoples were going to descend from the highlands 
into the plains, contest with the Semites for the possession of 
the cultivated lands, and wrest from them the gains won 
by centuries of labour and invention. In less than three 
centuries (roughly from 2050 to 1750 B.C.) the political 
equilibrium which the Semites had established after 2,000 
years of effort will be upset, to the profit of newcomers, 
the Kassites, the Hittites, and the Mitannians; the recoil of 
this catastrophe in Hither Asia will be felt to the utmost 
limits of the Oriental world. 

Towards the end of the third millennium, tribes of Aryan 
race, the ancestors of the Indo-Europeans, were settled to the 

* Hall, XIX, 86, 159; the Kamares vase is reproduced on Plate Til} a 


cf. Hall, ‘*‘ The relations of “i gean with the Egyptian Art” (XIII, vol. I, 


pp. 116 7f.). On the consequences of these facts as affecting the chronology 
of the period, see below, p. 253, note 3. 


IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS 285 


east of the Caspian and the Sea of Aral. Their previous 
history is still unknown. They reveal themselves at the 
moment when, driven forward either by a change in the 
climate of the plains of Turkestan or under the pressure of 
Mongolian peoples, they deserted their settlements to seek 
more fertile or less disputed territories. Their tumultuous 
flood divided into two streams: the one poured by way of 
the River Indus in the direction of Hindustan, there to come 
to rest; the other crossed the plateau of Iran and descended 
the terraces which border the valleys of the Euphrates, the 
Tigris, and the Chaboras. To this second stream belonged 
the Medes, who stopped on the plateau of Iran and colonized 
its south-western part for more than a thousand years, and 
the Kassites, who, continuing their migration, were the first 
to come in contact with the Semites of Mesopotamia. 

Are the Kassites (or Cosseans) Aryans? Opinions are 
divided on this point. The Kassite terms preserved in Baby- 
lonian documents exhibit a relationship with the dialects of 
the mountain tribes of Iran, and are different from Indo- 
Kuropean, Elamite, Sumerian, and Semitic. Nevertheless, 
a certain number of personal and divine names are closely 
allied to those of Aryan languages. The Kassites must, then, 
at least have experienced influence from the Aryans—a 
necessary consequence of close proximity. They had, more- 
over, borrowed from the Aryans, a race of horsemen, an 
animal hitherto unknown to the Oriental world—the horse, 
which furnished migrant peoples with an ally of prime im- 
portance alike for the journey and for battle. It was from 
the Kassites, arrived in the vicinity of Mesopotamia, that 
the Babylonians learned to know ‘“‘ the ass of the mountains ”’ 
harnessed to the travelling waggon or the war chariot, the 
first reference to which in cuneiform documents appears 
about 1900 B.c. 

The first successors of Hammurabi beheld their eastern 
frontier invaded by floods of Kassites, driven forward by the 
Aryans’ migrations. Samsu-Iluna (2080-2048 B.c.) repeatedly 
gave battle against them. I refer the reader to M. Dela- 
porte’s book, Mesopotamia, for the account of their slow but 
ultimately invincible infiltration, which culminated three 


1 Meyer, XXII, § 146, concludes that the Kassites are not Aryans; the 
contrary view is maintained by Hall, XIX, 201. 


236 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


centuries later (about 1760 B.c.) in the installation of a 
Kassite dynasty at Babylon. 


A storm, still more threatening for Semitic civilization, 
was brewing on the northern frontier, in that vast region 
which extends from the Augean Sea to the Caucasus, where 
the people termed Asianic lived. 

In 1925 3.c. Babylon was sacked by an invasion of 
Hittites, who overthrew the throne of Hammurabi’s suc- 
cessors. This attack achieved a brutal, decisive, but short- 
lived result. That differentiates it fundamentally from the 
insidious but lasting penetration by the Kassites. The 
Hittites invaded Mesopotamia through the valley of the 
Kuphrates, which they descended, coming from the Taurus 
region or the Anatolian table-lands. 

This is their first appearance on the stage of history; 
their origin is very uncertain in the present state of our 
knowledge. We find them established astride the great 
routes of the plateau of Asia Minor, and divided into two 
groups—one in the Halys Valley on the route leading to the 
Black Sea and in the vicinity of the iron mines of Cappa- 
docia, the other on the Cilician coast and in the district of 
the Taurus and Amanus ranges on roads leading to the 
Mediterranean and in proximity to the Taurus iron mines. 
Whence did they come? Like the Kassites, they seem to 
have formed the advance guard of Asianic peoples in migra- 
tion, who drove them in front of the main body. But it is 
unknown whether they came from Europe after crossing the 
Bosphorus, or from the Caucasus, or, again, from the plains 
of Central Asia. Their forward movement and establishment 
in Asia Minor were contemporary with the Aryan migration. 
Perhaps they had been forced into Anatolia while the 
Kassites had been thrust aside down the Iranian slopes. 

For information as to their origin the Hittites’ written 
monuments have been scrutinized with passionate interest. 
The inscribed documents belong to two classes: some make 
use of the Babylonian cuneiform signs to express the Hittite 

* Consult Ed. Meyer, XXXVI,; Ed. Pottier, “* L’art hittite ” in XI, vol. 
I (1920); Cowley, The Hittites (1917); G. Contenau, “‘ Les Hittites” in 
Mercure de France (Mar. 1, 1922). ‘*To some,” writes Contenau, ‘ they 


would be the ancient Pelasgians who had crossed the Hellespont; to others 
again the proto-Armenians,”? 


IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS 237 


language, others exhibit a picture writing of rude appearance 
and distinct from the Egyptian and Sumerian hieroglyphics. 
The texts written in these pictographic signs have not yet 
been deciphered; those which use the Babylonian script are 
to-day interpreted with sufficient certitude for a compre- 
hension of their meaning, but are not yet clear enough 
for the classification of paradigms and grammatical forms. 
Among the decipherers, Hrozny assigns the Hittite speech 
to the western group of Indo-European languages, on the 
strength of its kinship with Lydian and Latin; Weidner holds 
it to be a Caucasian tongue influenced by Aryan elements; 
others, again, like Cooley, distinguished in the existing 
documents at least two languages and several dialects.! It 
looks as if the Hittites formed no unitary people, but an 
aggregate of tribes, who by development became a con- 
federacy of small States.’ 

The figured monuments, the oldest of which do not take 
us back beyond the fourteenth century, show us the Hittites 
under a physical aspect quite distinct from that of the 
Semites. They are thick-set, broad-shouldered men whose 
heavy type (Fig. 21) betrays their mountain origin and is 
utterly unlike the slender elegance of the Arabs and the 
robust stolidity of the Canaanites and Chaldeans. The 
Egyptian bas-reliefs, which are still our oldest source for a 
knowledge of these Asiatics, depict them with obvious and 
studied fidelity. Thence we learn to recognize these long, 
beardless faces which are shaved on the forehead, while the 
hair falls in two masses over the shoulders and forms a tress, 
sometimes short and twisted like a plait, sometimes long and 
thin like a Chinese pigtail (Fig. 35). The brow is high and 
retreating, but the nose forms one straight line with the 


1 Fr. Hrozny, Dre Sprache der Hittiter (1917); Weidner in Mit. der 
Deutschen Orient-Gesell. (1917); Forrer, zbid. (1922), and in Zeitsch 
Deutschen Morgenland-Gesell. (1922); Sayce in Anatolian Studies presented 
to Sir William Ramsay and Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1920), p. 
58. The latter author holds the principal language of the Hittite texts to 
be Asianic. 

* “What is clear from the present state of our studies’? (writes G. 
Contenau, /.c., p. 899), ‘‘ is the extraordinary mixture of elements which went 
to make up the Hittite kingdom; Indo-European elements derived from 
the Armenian region, probably Caucasian and Asianic elements, possible 
re-enforcements of European elements, that is the picture given by a study 
of the language, religion and sculptured monuments.” 


238 =FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


forehead, without any depression at the bridge, and is 
prominent and convex. The lips are thick, the chin short 
and retreating; the eyes slant up obliquely toward the 
temples. There is something Mongolian about this type, to 
which we still find analogies among the Turks and Armenians 
of to-day." 

The Hittites’ costume included a long, unornamented 
robe descending very low; later they adopted the Egyptian 
loincloth or the heavy robe of embroidered wool of the 
Semites. Two features were persistently preserved, at least 





Fic. 21.—HiIrtTitE SOLDIER WEARING A BEARD IN SEMITIC STYLE. 


in the case of kings—a high, pointed cap shaped like a tiara 
and supple top-boots in which the upturned toes, like those 
of medieval shoes, are distinctive.” The Hittites produce the 
impression of great physical strength. Their armament was 
very perfect. Together with the shield, sometimes rect- 
angular, sometimes indented at the sides (Fig. 8), they 
carried the pike, the double axe, the long dagger, and the 
sword. Thanks to the possession of the mines of Cappadocia 
and the Taurus, they were one of the first peoples of the 
Orient to use iron lance-heads and sword-blades. At an 
epoch later than that which concerns us here they will adopt 
as protection for their heads in war a metal cap surmounted 
by a crest with a waving plume, the prototype of the helmet 
with large crest and nodding plumes of the ASgeans and 


1 Maspero, XX, II, 353; Ed. Meyer, XXXVI, 13, Pls. ceerh. 
2 Ed. Meyer, XXXVI, Pls, XIV-XV. 


. 


IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS 239 


Homer’s heroes.' Like the Kassites, the Hittites had domes- 
ticated the horse even before its appearance in Mesopotamia, 
and used it harnessed to the chariot, principally for war. 


They arrived either by the Upper Euphrates or by the 
Cilician Gates, in the vicinity of that Mesopotamia the 
plains of which were but fields of wheat and orchards filled 
with an unheard-of variety of fruit-trees, and the towns of 
which were replete with all the riches and seductions of an 
already luxurious civilization. The temptation was no less 
potent for the Hittites than for the Kassites. But the former, 
a robust and adventurous race, did not proceed by timid 
attempts and slow infiltrations; their flood rushed on with 
the impetus of a torrent and seized Babylon in a single 
irruption (1925).* Their victory was complete and sufficed 
to overthrow the Ist Dynasty of Babylon. It was, however, 
ephemeral and profited others than the Hittites. The 
Sumerians for a century and a half recovered the advantage 
over the Semites in Shinar and founded the dynasty of the 
Land of the Sea (1925-1761 B.c.); and then the Kassites, who 
had continued their migration and gradual occupation of 
the country, took advantage of the general convulsion to 
instal themselves definitely. They succeeded in 1760 B.c. in 
re-establishing the unity of Sumer and Akkad, under the 
authority of a Kassite dynasty (which lasted till 1185). 

For these 600 years which saw the Hyksés, the Egyptians, 
and the Hittites in Hither Asia, Babylon played only a third- 
class part. No doubt the Kassites, like the other barbarians 
who had preceded them, were assimilated by the old elements 
in the population. Still, the result was an enfeebled race and 
a dynasty lacking the financial and military means for con- 
tinuing the traditional Babylonian policy of-expansion. It 
was a period of inertia, and is otherwise scarcely known and 
almost devoid of monuments. Thus the eclipse of Babylon 
during the second millennium is explained by the aftermath 
of the Kassite and Hittite invasions. 

As for the Hittites, after their triumphal raid the bulk of 
their forces withdrew into Cilicia and Cappadocia loaded with 
treasures, idols, and royal statues, which the recent excava- 


* Ed. Pottier, XI, vol. I, 268 7. 
2 Ed, Meyer, XXXVI, 57. 


240 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


tions have unearthed.! From this short domination in Shinar 
the Hittites retained respect for Babylonian civilization, from 
which they borrowed the characters of several of their 
deities,? much of their art,? and that necessary instrument 
of civilization, writing. They remained in contact with 
Babylon and the Amorites through elements in the popula- 
tion established as colonists or landowners in the Fertile 
Crescent. When Abraham left Ur of the Chaldees to proceed 
up the Euphrates and go down again into Syria as far as 
the neighbourhood of Hebron in Palestine, he had business 
relations with “the sons of Heth’’ (Gen. xxiii, 3) at an 
epoch which may correspond to the Hittite conquest. In 
several passages in the Bible we meet ‘“‘ the traditional 
memory of a people who had occupied the land long before 
the arrival of the Israelites in Palestine. The preponderant 
part played by this people in the foundation of important 
cities—Jerusalem among the rest—has not been forgotten. 
In the maledictions of Ezechiel the prophet says to the city: 
‘Thy father was an Amorite, thy mother a Hittite.’ ’” 
The conquest of Syria-Palestine by the Hittites was only 
realized later, but the way was prepared for it by colonies 
scattered at the beginning of the second millennium. 


With the Kassites and the Hittites a third element 
appears to us in the mosaic of migrating peoples: this is the 
Mitanni folk. We see them insinuating themselves between 
the Assyrians and the Hittites of the Taurus, between the 
Tigris and the Orontes astride the Euphrates in the *‘ Land 
of the Two Rivers’’ (Naharina), a strategic position of the 
utmost importance at the junction of the roads which lead 
from Mesopotamia to the Black Sea, the Mediterranean, and 
Egypt, and in the inverse direction. The Mitannians are 
distinguished from the Hittites, and resemble the Kassites 
in a close kinship with the Aryan races. Their language, 
known from a long letter found at El-Amarna (p. 290 below), 
seems Caucasian in type, but also includes elements resem- 
bling Hittite. Their gods are of the same type as those of 

1 King, Chronicles, i, 148; Meyer, XXXVI. 

2 Cf. Haddad, Astarte, and Tammuz-Adonis with Teshub, the Mother 
Goddess, and the Son-God among the Hittites. 


’ Ed. Pottier in XI, vol. I, 264 7. 
4 G. Contenau, Mercure de France, l.c., p. 380. 


IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS 241 


the Hittites, but among them we find named in the fifteenth 
century the great Aryan gods—Mitra, Varuna, Indra, and 
the Agvin twins.!' The impression produced by later docu- 
ments (once more provided chiefly by Egypt) is that the 
basis of the population of Mitanni was perhaps at home in 
Asia Minor, but the warriors, denoted by the Aryan word 
Merinau (young men),? and the kings, who bore Aryan 
names, belonged to conquering tribes forming a sort of 
military aristocracy,’ who governed an alien mass. That is 
the historic réle played in our own time by the Turkish and 
Kurdish nobles in the same region.* We have much less 
information about the Mitannians than about the Hittites. 
Yet they played a prominent part in the first half of the 
second millennium s.c. Mitannian names are borne by several 
chiefs in Syria and Palestine, which indicates the geographical 
extension of the race. But after some glorious centuries (see 
p. 289 below) the Mitannians were annihilated by their two 
mighty rivals, the Hittites and the Assyrians. Their monu- 
ments have, up till now, disappeared from history with their 
political domination. 

For the subsequent evolution of Hither Asia we refer the 
reader to M. Delaporte’s book, Mesopotamia, and to M. 
Glotz’s Zigean Civilization. Here let it suffice to conclude 
by insisting on the historical significance of the events which 
the scarcity of texts allows us to sketch rather than to 
describe. The invasions by Aryan and Asianic tribes at the 
beginning of the second millennium put an end to a great 
Semitic empire which was in embryo in the extensions of the 
Babylonian-Amorite realm of Hammurabi at once towards 
Asia Minor and towards Palestine. On the Syrian coast the 
Egyptians had interposed the barrier of their armies; in 
Asia Minor less resistance was encountered, since no organized 
State occupied its table-lands. And so the Babylonians had 
already advanced their soldiers and their merchants towards 
the mines of the Taurus and the Cilician Gates to secure 
access to the Eastern Mediterranean (see p. 207 above). 


* Winckler, Mitt. Deutsch. Ortent-Gesell. (Dec., 1907), 51. 
* Annals of. Thothmes III (cf. zufra, p. 275). 
* Calling themselves by the name A harrt=Aryans (Hall, 201, n. 6). This 
interpretation is disputed by King, XIII, vol. IV, Pp. 192: 
* Meyer, XXXVI, 58. 
16 


242 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


Excavations! have proved that in the direction of the mines 
of Cappadocia and on the Halys route their ambition was no 
less and their advance no less well planned. About 2300 B.c. 
a Babylonian colony” was flourishing at the foot of the 
voleano, Mount Argeeus, at Mazaca, the site where Cesarea, 
the capital of the Hellenistic kingdom of Cappadocia, was to 
rise later on. Through it passes a great caravan route, which 
migrations of peoples and armies followed, the future Royal 
Road of the Persian Empire which Herodotus describes 
(v, 2). From Cesarea it reaches the centre of the Halys 
basin at Pteria; there it bifurcates, sending out one branch 
towards the Black Sea, which it reaches at the port of 
Sinope, and the other towards. the Avgean through Sardes, 
to come out at the port of Ephesus. The site was therefore 
perfectly chosen to control communications between Meso- 
potamia on the one hand and the Euxine and At’gean Seas 
on the other. 

The Babylonians were not alone in coveting this gateway ; 
about the end of the third millennium the kings of Assyria, 
very humble vassals of Babylonia, had advanced into Cappa- 
docia along the Upper Euphrates, crossed the river at Meli- 
tene, and pressed on as far as Mazaca. Thereafter Assyrian 
names overlay the Babylonian at this site.’ Thus in the heart 
of Cappadocia the ambitious projects of the Assyrian kings 
are attested at a very early epoch, while in Assyria itself not 
a single contemporary text has been discovered to reveal 
them to us. The Babylonians and Assyrians in Asia Minor 
found themselves in contact with the migrant peoples long 
before they faced their onslaught in Mesopotamia ; the horses, 
which the newcomers brought with them, already appear on 
the cylinders and small objects exhumed at Mazaca.* 

The Semitic colony at Mazaca disappeared when from the 
north and east the Hittites, Mitannians, and their allies came 
in force to occupy the plateau. Soon the Hittite invasion 
descended upon Mesopotamia and expanded right to Babylon. 


1 Chantre, Mission en Cappadoce (1898); G. Contenau, 7rente tablettes 
capadociennes (1919). 

2 XXXVI, 51. 

8’ This expansion of Assyrians along the route to the Black Sea explains 
why the Greek geographers gave the name Assyria to the coastal region 
of the Halys and the territory of the Sinope (KXXVI, 52). 

XXXVI, 54-55. 


IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS 248 


**Thus,’? as G. Contenau writes, ‘‘the Hittites are the 
rival power which forbade (the Semites) access to the road to 
Europe, thrust them back into Mesopotamia after the raid 
which put an end to the Ist Dynasty of Babylon, and, as a 
recoil, directed them towards Egypt, where the Syrian- 
Semitic element played a prominent part at the time of the 
Hyksés invasion. . . . Thus we see the Semitic bloc, consti- 
tuted by Mesopotamia and Syria, surrounded by non-Semitic 
peoples—the Elamites on the east, the peoples of Van and of 
Mitanni on the north, the Hittites on the west. We have to 
wait for the Mussulman invasions to see the Semites realizing 
the expansion which they were already attempting at the 
dawn of their history.’”! 


III 
Tue Hyxsos Invasion In Ecypr 


The capture of Babylon by the Hittites (1925 B.c.) falls 
about the middle of the XIIth Dynasty of Egypt. The 
accession of the Kassites at Babylon (1760) coincides with 
the beginning of the XIIIth Dynasty (about 1788 3.c.). At 
the end of the XIIIth Dynasty an invasion coming from Asia, 
that of the barbarian Hyksés, conquered Lower Egypt. A 
connection between these great facts is evident. Egypt, the 
wealth and fertility whereof were proverbial, could not 
escape the attacks of the barbarians; as soon as they had 
devoured and digested the civilized States of Asia, they 
descended the corridor which leads along the coast from the 
Euphrates to the Nile and tried to invade the Delta. 

This period, during which Egypt underwent the same trials 
as the other old Asiatic civilizations, is still very obscure. 
Just as texts are silent or wanting in Babylonia in the critical 
centuries when the Hittites and Kassites occupied Shinar, so 
in Egypt the monuments seem to disappear at the same time 
as the barbarians approach. However, it is established that 
the invasion was preceded by a period of slow and peaceful 
infiltration analogous to that of the Kassites in Babylonia. 

The narrative of the adventures of Sinuhet teaches us that 
Kgyptian emigrants were numerous and welcome in Syria 
at the beginning of the XIIth Dynasty. In the sixth year of 


1 Mercure de France, l.c., p. 399. 


244 






FIRST 


<< SSD 
wieswne j 


sere Mee fe 


Oi, 
Gs. ba 2 


EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


ow 


6° ye Oe ee orc ere e nse es oO ot we 


AIDA A. 


DLy 
Na Wore: et 
REO 


BATS 


lata 


v 





i i 

A f 

rf) 4 

SX [xppb0 ae 
S.A 


SS EL : 











} 





Fic, 22.—ARRIVAL OF CANAANITES AT BENI-HASAN ABOUT 1900 B.c. 


(After Newberry, Beni-Hasan, 1, Pl. 30.) 


IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS 245 


Senusert II (about 1900 B.C.), approximately twenty-five 
years after the capture of Babylon by the Hittites, a picture 
carved on the wall of a tomb at Beni-Hasan (Middle Egypt) 
attests the fact that one of the important events of the epoch 
had been the installation of Asiatic emigrants far from the 
Delta, in the heart of the Nile Valley. A band of warriors 
armed with bows, lances, and boomerangs, dressed in woollen 
robes adorned with variegated patterns, or loincloths in 
Egyptian style, arrives in the presence of the nomarch, 
escorting asses loaded with thin packs of antimony powder, 
an Asiatic product. A lyre-player and a warrior accompany 
the women, whose heavy robes are richly embroidered. The 
chief (keqa khast—* sheik of the desert? *) of this small tribe 
of thirty-seven persons drives before him an ibex, which he 
presents as a gift; his name is Ibsha (F ig. 22). A royal scribe 
is handing to the nomarch a tablet, on which it is written 
that ** some Amu are come, to the number of thirty-seven, to 
bring to the nomarch antimony powder from the Empty-land 
(the desert).’”! 

The intervention of an officer of the royal administration, 
who himself counts and introduces the Asiatics, shows that 
their settlement at Beni-Hasan had an official character. 
They are neither traders nor free artisans coming to try their 
fortunes in Egypt, but a complete family or a small tribe 
who have implored Pharaoh’s hospitality, and whom he has 
directed to the nome of Beni-Hasan. This is the first time 
that such a scene has been depicted in Egypt; the document 
is still unique. Is not the inevitable inference an exodus of 
the people from Palestine, driven to Egypt by some excep- 
tional event, and seeking a refuge under the shelter of 
Pharaoh? The approximation of the date (1900 B.c.) to that 
of the Hittite invasion (1925) allows us to assume that this 
exodus was somehow correlated with the disturbance of the 
nomad populations thrust into the corridor which leads to 
Egypt. 

Now, in the reign of the next sovereign, Senusert III, the 
Egyptian armies were seriously engaged in the centre of 
Palestine; the danger had therefore become instant. Senu- 
sert IIIT went himself “‘to smite the Mentiu-Settiu of 
Sekmem (Shechem), and wretched Lotanu was overthrown.’’ 


. Bibliography : Maspero, XX, I, 468; c/. Weill, X, vol. VIII, p. 204. 


246 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


General Sebek-Khu, who relates the event, had, nevertheless, 
to ‘protect the rear-guard ’’ of the Egyptian army against 
the Amu, and prides himself on ‘‘ not having turned his 
back.’’! The circumstance indicates that the Egyptian army 
had to fight a retreating action without much glory. A 
change of tone is noticeable in the narrative of warlike ex- 
ploits; we have the epithet ‘‘ wretched’ applied to the 
Asiatics—an epithet never previously met in accounts of 
campaigns in Asia. However, the Egyptian armies were still 
masters of the situation. In the forty-fifth year of Amenem- 
hat III (about 1804 B.c.) the captain of an expedition, 
Phtahur, says that ‘‘ he had brought the king the tribute of 
the Mentiu on his return from mysterious valleys and from 
remote lands hitherto unknown.’’? On the other hand, 
emissaries were despatched as ambassadors to the sheik of 
Lotanu.® There is no doubt that the situation in Palestine 
was preoccupying Pharaoh’s mind. 


What happened under the XIIIth Dynasty (1788-1660 
B.c.), and how the storm brewing at the gates of Egypt 
eventually burst the last barriers, we do not really know, in 
the absence of monuments. Everything points to the infer- 
ence that the external peril was augmented by the fact that 
very numerous kings followed one another after very brief 
reigns upon the throne of Egypt; that is the usual symptom 
of anarchy in Egypt. A period of dynastic rivalries and 
intestine wars, complicated by foreign invasions, extends 
from the XIIIth to the XVIIth Dynasties. The Theban 
Middle Kingdom ended then like the Old Kingdom, with 
this difference—that the social troubles were less serious. On 
the other hand, the Asiatic danger was very threatening. 
History and chronology here suffer from the almost total lack 
of important monuments, the normal consequence of in- 
vasions in Oriental countries. | 

The official sources give hardly any help. The tables 
Saqqarah and Abydos pass over in silence all the Pharaohs 
from the end of the XIIth to the beginning of the XVIIth 


* Garstang, El Arabah, Pls. 4-5; cf. X, vol. IX, pp. 2 #. For the identi- 
fication of Sekmem, see XXII, § 290. 

4 XVII; 'I,.728. 

* Weill in X, vol. IX, pp. 9-10; cf. XXII, § 289. 


IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS 247 


Dynasty ;1 the Turin Papyrus, sadly mutilated, enumerates 
a great number of royal names, the classification of which is 
extremely difficult, but which probably belong to contem- 
porary local dynasties. As for the Greek authorities, far 
from dissipating the obscurity, they only pile up legends, 
errors, and contradictions. The abbreviators of Manetho do 
not hesitate to attribute 1,570 years to the interval separat- 
ing the XIIth from the XVIIth Dynasty, but the accurate 
data resulting from the Sothic dates reduce these fabulous 
figures to 210 years, according to the demonstration given 
by Eduard Meyer.” As we shall shortly see (p. 253, note 38), 
this *“‘ short chronology ’’* is confirmed by recent discoveries 
in Crete and the rest of the Oriental world. 

With these reservations as to the number of the kings and 
the inflated chronology of Manetho, we can make use of the 
dynasties as a convenient framework for arranging the rare 
historical facts which emerge from the chaos. 

The XIIIth Dynasty includes in reality three royal 
families whose numerous sovereigns, from their very short 
reigns, have left only rare monuments. Several of these 
Pharaohs were usurpers, as is evident from the unusual titles 
which figure in their cartouches. One of them adopts as 
royal name his title of ‘‘ General ’’; another inscribes in that 
place his surname ‘‘ the Negro.’’ The latter, who belongs to 
the end of the dynasty, declares himself ‘* beloved by the 
god Seth of Avaris.’** Now, Seth is the Egypto-Semitic god 
of the Asiatic invaders, the Hyksés; Avaris is their capital. 
It is therefore highly probable that before the end of the 
XIIth Dynasty, consequently by 1700 B.c., the Hyksés had 
reached the Delta and imposed their yoke upon the Egyptian 
kings, at least in Lower Egypt. 

The name Hyksdés, given to these invaders, comes to us 
from Manetho, quoted by the Jewish historian Josephus. He 
applies it to the chiefs rather than to the peoples themselves, 
and says that it is composed of two terms—i«x=hyk, which 
meant king in the sacred language, and ows, the meaning of 
which in the vulgar tongue was shepherd; the whole would 

* On the other hand, the Karnak list cites thirty-five names belonging to 
the XIIIth and XVIIth Dynasties. 
2 XXIII, 79 #f.; XXII, 8§ 298 7. 


° It is disputed by several historians such as Petrie and G. Maspero. 
XXII, § 301. 


248 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


then make up “shepherd kings” (BaciAeis troipéves). This 
explanation of Manetho’s is not devoid of verisimilitude, for, 
as we have seen, the Egyptians called by the name heqa the 
Arab, Palestinian, and Syrian sheiks of Sinai or Lotanu. On 
the other hand, shés in Coptic means “ shepherd,’’ and 
comes from an Egyptian word, sha’su, applied to the nomads 
of Arabia and Palestine. However, it is generally admitted 
that this is a case of a false “‘ folk-etymology.”? The true 
origin of the word seems to lie in the term heqa-kha’st— 
** regent of the desert or of foreign lands ’’—which from the 
VIth Dynasty to Ptolemaic times usually denoted the chiefs 
of Asiatic tribes.'| Let us recall that the chief of the Semitic 
tribe settled by Senusert II at Beni-Hasan bore this very 
title heqa-kha’st, from which the word Hyksés might be 
derived. In the future the conquering kings of the XVIIIth 
Dynasty will continue to apply this name to a part of the 
Asiatic tribes whom they combated.? 

Of the final invasion Manetho has composed an account 
(preserved by Josephus) which we must quote. It is the only 
extant evidence about those barbarian invasions from which 
Babylonia and Syria had suffered before the Nile Valley. 

** In the reign of King Timezeus’ the breath of divine wrath 
smote us I know not why; contrary to all expectations, men 
of unknown race, come from the Kast, dared to invade our 
country, took possession of it easily and without combat, 
made prisoners its chiefs, then savagely burned the cities, 
pillaged the gods’ temples, and grievously maltreated the 
inhabitants, butchering some and reducing others to slavery 
with their wives and children. Finally they made one of 
their number, named Salatis, king. He dwelt at Memphis, 
levied tribute on the upper and the lower province,‘ and 
placed garrisons in the best sites. He fortified particularly 
the eastern frontier, foreseeing that the Assyrians, becoming 
one day stronger, would desire to invade his realm... . 
And so he fortified Avaris and planted a garrison of 240,000 
men there. He came thither in the summer season both to 


* Weill, La jin du moyen Empire, 187; cf. B. Gunn and Alan H. Gardiner 
in XIII, vol. V, p. 38. 

* Sethe in XII, 47, 84. 

* Not known from the monuments. 

* Lower and Upper Egypt. 


IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS 249 


distribute wheat and pay wages, and also to train his troops 
assiduously so as to inspire the foreigners with fear. . . .°”! 

No hieroglyphic text gives a narrative which can be 
compared with that of Manetho, but it is not customary for 
the official documents to describe disasters inflicted upon 
Egypt. 

On the contrary, after the day of vengeance we find 
allusions to the unspeakable times of defeat, when Egypt 
was devoured by the ‘‘ plague’’ (iadt)? of the invaders. 
Thothmes I will say of his own subjects: ‘“‘I have made 
victorious those who were in fear, and I have rid them of 
the evil.’’? Queen Hatshepsut recalls “‘ that she has restored 
what was in ruins since the days when the Amu resided in the 
periphery of the Delta and Avaris, and when the nomads 
(Shemamu) among them overthrew what had been estab- 
lished. They reigned, ignoring the god Ra, and no one 
obeyed the orders of the god.’* At a later date a popular 
tale, which has come down to us in a XI Xth Dynasty edition, 
expresses itself thus: ‘‘ It happened, therefore, that the land 
of Egypt belonged to the pestilential ones, that there was no 
(legitimate) lord king. The day came when King Seqeninra 
was prince in the land of the South, the pestilential ones 
(were) in the city of the Amu, and Chief Apopi in Avaris; for 
he commanded the whole land which brought him all its 
tribute, and all the good things of North Egypt. . . . Now, 
King Apopi prayed to the god Sutekhu as his master, and 
there was no longer tribute for any god of the land save for 
Sutekhu alone. . . .”> Merneptah at the end of the XIXth 
Dynasty recalls the events in the same terms: ‘* That had 
not been seen in the annals of the kings of Lower Egypt when 
this land of Egypt was in their hands, when the plague came 
upon it in that time when of the kings of Upper Egypt none 
was found to repulse them. . . .’’® 

M. Raymond Weill, taking advantage of the vagueness 
of these narratives, regards the whole story of the Hyksés 

* Josephus, C. Apzon. I, 44, 85; cf. Th. Reinach, Zextes relatifs & UV histoire 
du Judaisme, p. 28. 

* Cf. Gardiner, Admonitions, II, 5-6, same expression. 

* Sethe, ‘Neue Spuren der Hyksos”? in XII, vol. XLVII, p. 78 (cf. 
Urk., IV, 102). 


* Urkunden, IV, 890. ° Maspero, Contes, p. 289. 
® Rougé, luscriptions hiérogl., 188-9. 


250 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


invasion as a legendary construction. In his opinion the 
Hyks6és kings were in reality only an Egyptian dynasty of 
the Delta, who would have taken Asiatics into their service 
to combat the Theban kings; he regards as commonplaces 
without historical value the evidence we have just cited. 
That is not the opinion of the majority of historians.? In 
our opinion the vagueness of the Egyptian texts is explicable 
by the pride of the Pharaohs and the shame of reviving in 
clear terms the days of defeat, but we feel no doubt that the 
passages quoted above refer to a real invasion. 

No pictorial monument enlightens us as to the physical 
type of the Hyksés. The human-headed sphinxes, in which 
Mariette thought he could discern the rude physiognomy of 
barbarian conquerors,*® are, in point of fact, portraits of 
Amenemhat III. We are no better informed on the ethnic 
origin of the Hyksés. Manetho says “that they came from 
the East, and takes them for Phcenicians, while others call 
them Arabs.’’* The Egyptian texts call them Asiatics 
(Amu), Beduins (Mentiu), mountaineers (Khastiu), or 
nomads (Shemamu).° Among them numerous Syrian and 
Semitic elements were to be found; proof is to be found in 
the onomasticon of the sovereigns and chiefs, where we find 
such names as Khian, Jaqob-her, Anat-her, which recall 
Canaanite gods and heroes; but other names, such as Bnon, 
Apakhnan, ete., which are neither Semitic nor Egyptian, 
probably come from Asia Minor. The Hyksés were certainly 
a heterogeneous mass into which the Amorites and the 
Semites had been swept by a torrent of migrating peoples 
impelled by a movement parallel to that of the Kassites, 
Hittites, and Mitannians.° By themselves the Canaanites, 
repeatedly defeated by the Egyptians, would never have been 
able to force the fortified barrier of the Delta. It must be 
admitted that they were enclosed among other peoples, those 

+ La fin du moyen Empire égyptien (1918); this work is of great use 
owing to its excellent documentation. 

* Meyer, XXII, § 303; Gardiner and Gunn in XIII, vol. V, p. 86; vol. III, 

. Lo, 
f * G. Maspero, XX, I, 503, and Ti2bG; 

* Ap. Josephus, C. Apion., I, 14, 85. 

* The names Khastiu and Shemamu, Shasu will also characterize the 
Syrian populations at the time of the campaigns of the Thothmes. 


* G,. Maspero, XX, vol. II, pp. 55 7; Meyer, XXXVI, p. 58, and XXII, 
§ 304. 


68 ee ie TF Ete 


IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS 251 


warriors of whom Manetho speaks, who continued to devote 
themselves to military manceuvres in the field of Avaris. 
These were probably vigorous and bold barbarians armed 
with swords of bronze and iron, and employing horses har- 
nessed to the terrible war-chariots which the Egyptians knew 
not before their advent. It was this people, better armed 
than the Egyptians, who defeated the militia of the nomes 
and Pharaoh’s black troops, badly led by a disorganized 
Government. So the directive force of the Hyksés may well 
have been one of those new-come nations—Kassites, Hittites, 
Mitannians, or their kin—while the rabble swept on by the 
invasion was composed of Amorites and Canaanites. The 
paucity of Egyptian documents permits of no greater pre- 
cision, but much is to be hoped from the excavations at the 
moment in progress in Syria, on the route followed by the 
Hyksoés, where they may have left vestiges of their passage. 

The thrusting aside of Semitic peoples by the invaders 
involved displacements of entire tribes. At the beginning 
of the Kassite invasions in Shinar the Phoenicians, whose 
original habitat seems to have been the islands and ports of 
the Persian Gulf, emigrated across the desert to the Red Sea 
and then to the Mediterranean, and found on the Syrian 
coast ports and islands suited to their maritime tastes.’ The 
first tribe of Israel, under the leadership of the patriarch 
Abraham, following the curve of the Fertile Crescent, by 
short stages passed, at the same epoch, from Chaldza into 
Palestine, where it met the Hittites. Later, after the entry 
of the Hyksés into Egypt, the companions of Jacob and 
Joseph’ could make their way into the Nile Valley; ‘‘ a quite 
ancient tradition tells that they arrived in Egypt in the reign 
of one of the Hyksés kings, Aphdbis (one of the Apophis).’”° 

Finally, those who would become the Hebrews—in par- 
ticular the Edomites—began to penetrate into Canaan. They 
were still unknown there under the XIIth Dynasty; we find 
them installed about the XIXth Dynasty (circa 1800 B.c.). 
Their irruption into the country, then, began in the interval 
or round about the sixteenth century. The Edomites helped 
to push the Canaanites in the direction of Egypt, which they 





* XX, vol. II, pp. 62-64. 
* These names appear on scarabs of the Hyksés period, Weill, /.c., 184 7. 
waa OLLI Vp, 71; 


252, FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


entered mixed up pall-mall with the other Asiatic peoples in 
migration.? 


The Hyksés domination in the Nile Valley was, then, an 
event of world history, and not merely an episode in Egyp- 
tian history. In this period of eighty years, from 1660 to 
1580 B.c., we are witnesses of an attempt at a great barbarian 
empire; its centre of gravity lay at Avaris? (probably 
Pelusium, on the eastern border of the Delta). Egypt was 
but the southern half of this empire; the corridor of Pales- 
tine-Syria formed its northern half. Perhaps the Fertile 
Crescent was subject to the hegemony of a single master at 
least for some dozen years. 

It is from Manetho and the Egyptian monuments that we 
derive our knowledge of the names of the Hyks6és_ kings. 
After the XIIIth Dynasty, Manetho enumerates a XIVth, 
composed of national kings resident at Xois, west of the 
Delta; then the shepherd kings of Avaris form the XVth, 
XVIth, and XVIIth Dynasties, although in Upper Egypt 
some Theban princes also constitute a XVIIth national 
dynasty. The most reasonable plan for reconciling these 
divergent pieces of evidence is to accept the postulate that 
these dynasties were parallel? and for a century (1680-1580 
B.C.) reigned concurrently : 


AT AVARIS AND IN 


AT Xols. Lower Egypt. AT THEBES. 
The XIVth The XVth, XVIth The XVIIth 
Egyptian Dynasty and XVIIth Dynasties Dynasty of Upper 

(Western Delta). of Shepherds. Egypt. 


The shepherds of Avaris were much more powerful than 
the kinglets of Xois and the princes of Thebes. Two of them, 
Apophis and Khian (corresponding to the Apophis and 
Iannas of Josephus), received tribute from all Egypt and 


+ Isidore Lévy, ‘Les Horites, Edom et Jacob dans les monuments 
égyptiens ”’ in Revue des Etudes juives, LI, 46 ff. 

* Flinders Petrie thinks he has found the ruins of Avaris on the present 
site of Tell-el-Yahudieh between Memphis and Bubastis, but this city seems 
to have been only a small fortress. The most probable theory locates Avaris 
at Pelusium. On this topic consult Gardiner, The Geography of the Exodus, 
and on the other side J. Clédat, ‘‘le Site d’Avaris” in Recueil Champollion 
(1922). 

* XXII, §§ 305, 307. 


IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS 253 


possessed full authority over the lower valley of the Nile and 
over a great part of Upper Egypt. The conquerors had 
been quickly conquered by the refined civilization of Egypt, 
and had rapidly comprehended the political advantages of 
the wise administration of the Pharaohs. So we observe the 
kings of Avaris adopting the usages and titles of the Egyp- 
tian Court; they had statues carved in the official style, they 
had thousands of scarabs engraved, on which their names 
were written in hieroglyphics, but encircled with spirals or 
undulating and interlaced lines, according to the taste of the 
Asianic countries. The very temples of the Egyptian gods 
were maintained and restored by them.' But in Avaris and 
at Tanis the Baal of Syria, the Teshub of Asia Minor, was 
worshipped under the name of Sutekhu, a form derived from 
Seth, the Egyptian god of the desert and foreign lands. 

A sovereign like Khian appealed to the god Ra as much 
as to Sutekhu and Teshub; for he sought to unite under his 
sway Asia and Egypt, hitherto always separate. He in- 
scribed on his first royal cartouche the significant title ‘* He- 
who-embraces-the-countries.’’ While calling himself ‘* the 
good god”’ like the Pharaohs, he retained that old title 
of the Asiatic sheiks, keqa khast, from which the word 
** Hyksés *’ is perhaps derived. These claims to universal 
domination were, perhaps, justified by an authority extend- 
ing over the whole of the civilized Orient : we read the name 
of Khian on a block of granite at Gebelein between Thebes 
and the First Cataract, and on a statue from Bubastis in the 
Delta; it has been discovered also on scarabs among the 
ruins of Gezer in Palestine, on a small basalt lion found at 
Baghdad,’ and on an alabaster lid unearthed by Sir Arthur 
Evans in the Minoan palace of Knossos in Crete.’ It is not 

1 XXII, §§ 307, 308. 

2 Weill, Za fin du moyen Empire égyptien, 179 ff. 

* This find gives confirmation to the short chronology which reduces to a 
century the domination of the Hykséds in Egypt. The Cretans of Middle 
Minoan II traded with the Egyptians of the XIIth Dynasty; those of 
Middle Minoan III had relations with Khian of the XVth Dynasty; those 
of Late Minoan I sent ambassadors to the court of XVIIIth Dynasty Pharaohs. 
Now, the interval of time between Middle and Late Minoan could not be 
very long. The several palaces of Knossos were built in accordance with 
‘continuous architectural principles, ‘“‘in particular, the second reconstructed 


palace (about the end of the XVIIth Dynasty) was erected on foundations 
of the second palace (contemporary with the XIIIth Dynasty).’? As M. 


254 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


inconceivable that Khian should in truth have dominated 
the whole Oriental world from the First Cataract to the 
Persian Gulf, or imposed on it the terror of his arms from 
this central point at Avaris, midway between Egypt and 
Syria. 


But such an empire was not durable. It had nothing in 
it of that which constitutes a State; it is vain to seek in it 
for a principle of political, religious, or moral unity. The 
domination of the Hyksés was only a territorial occupation. 
Their strength rested on the weight of the populations who 
had submerged the Orient; the prestige due to superiority 
did not exist among them. Not even their military power 
was uncontested, since Thebes and Xois resisted and kept 
national sovereigns. Besides, they had neither the moral 
strength for expansion nor technical superiority. In Egypt 
they behaved like barbarians and parvenus; far from being 
able to impress their mark on Nilotic civilization, they 
became speedily Egyptianized. Hence the ephemeral 
character of their dominion, attested by the small number 
and trifling importance of the monuments which they left in 
Egypt and wherever they passed. As the Huns terrorized 
Kurope in the fifth century of our era, so the Hyksés 
terrorized the Oriental world, incapable of imposing them- 
selves save by force and numbers. Their domination col- 
lapsed about 1600 3B.c.; for some unknown reason the 
military machine which maintained them was abruptly 
broken and could not resist the shock of attacks coming from 
the south and perhaps from Assyria.! Thereafter, all that 
was left of the Hyksdés there, where they were established 
from the Nile to the Euphrates, was a heterogeneous mass 
which lost even its name, so rapid and complete was its 
absorption by the ancient populations. 

The Asianic and Aryan barbarians, come from Asia 
Minor, therefore showed themselves incapable of carrying 








Dussaud says, these observations ‘‘ are extremely favourable to Professor 
Meyer’s system and provide him with valuable support’? (XVIII, 55 7f.). 
See also Sir Arthur Evans, The Palace of Minos at Knossos, I (1921), pp. 18, 
31, 421, and G. Glotz, #gean Civilization (1925), pp. 26, 205. 

+ Manetho has preserved this hint that the Hyksés feared the Assyrians 
on their Asiatic flank (p. 248 above). 


IRANIAN AND ASIANIC INVASIONS 255 


to a successful conclusion the plans of empire sketched by 
the Semites and organized by Hammurabi. But their effec- 
tive domination of the whole Oriental world, precarious 
though it was, may have led the prudent statesmen of 
Thebes and Babylon to reflect on the means to be used for 
the organization of a more durable empire. 


CHAPTER II 


THE EGYPTIAN EMPIRE AND THE CONCERT OF 
NATIONS IN THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY 


Tue Hyksés invasion awakened national sentiment among 
the Egyptians, revealed to them the full gravity of the 
Asiatic danger, and inspired them with the design of neutral- 
izing it by imposing their domination on the whole Orient. 
These factors dictated a policy to which effect was given in 
three stages—the liberation of the Nile Valley, the conquest 
of Syria, and the creation of an Egyptian empire in Asia. 
This was the work of the XVIIIth Dynasty (1580-1821 B.c.), 
which reconstituted in the Nile Valley the New Theban 
Kingdom. 


if 
Tur Hyxs6s DRIVEN FROM EcypT 


The liberation of the land was due to the Theban princes. 
Upper Egypt had paid tribute to the Hyksdés of Avaris with- 
out having been occupied by them in a permanent manner. 
The princes of Thebes, grouped in the XVIIth Dynasty, had 
never ceased to maintain resistance against the Asiatics ; 
they soon initiated the war of independence. As a result of 
circumstances which escape us, the dominion of the shepherds 
was greatly weakened at the beginning of the sixteenth 
century. The Thebans were quick to seize the opportunity 
for intervention. Some episodes of the contest are known 
to us. 

The earliest date introduces us to a “ regent of Thebes ”’ 
named Seqeninra. He appears in a popular tale, from which 
we have already quoted (p. 249 above) a description of the 
occupation of the country by the Hyksés.} King Apophis 
had just built a magnificent temple to his god Sutekhu (the 
Syrian Baal) in Avaris. Every day he sacrificed victims 


* Pap. Sallier, I; cf. Maspero, Contes populaires, IV, 288 ff., and intro- 
duction, pp. xxvi, 7f.; cf. Gardiner, XIII, vol. V, 39 7. 
256 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 257 


there, ‘‘ and the vassal chiefs were present with garlands of 
flowers, just as in the temple of Ra.’’t On the completion of 
the edifice, Apophis dreamed of imposing the worship of his 
god on the Thebans; ‘‘ then, as he hesitated to employ force 
in such a delicate matter, he had recourse to a ruse. He 
took counsel with his princes and generals, but they knew 
not how to advise him. The college of soothsayers and 
scribes was more resourceful: * Let a messenger go to the 
regent of the city of the South to say unto him: “« King 
Apophis bids thee: Let the hippopotami which are upon the 
pool of the city be hunted upon the pool that they may 
allow sleep to come to me by night and by day.”’ He will 
know not how to answer for good or for evil, and thou 
shall’st send another messenger. “ King Apophis bids thee: 
If the regent of the South answer not my message, let him 
serve no longer any other god but Sutekhu. But if he reply 
thereto and do what I tell him, I will take naught from him, 
and I will no longer bow down before any other god but 
Amon-Ra, the king of the gods!”?’ ”’ 

Another Pharaoh of popular legend—Nectanebo—at a 
much later date bred mares which conceived by the neigh- 
ings of the stallions of Babylon and his friend Lycerus in 
Chaldea had a cat which went every night to strangle the 
cocks of Memphis. The hippopotami of the lake of Thebes, 
which disturbed the repose of the King of Tanis, are evi- 
dently close relatives of these extraordinary animals. The 
sequel of the tale is unfortunately lost. We may believe, 
without fear of being very wide of the mark, that Seqeninra 
came through the ordeal safe and sound. Apophis fell into 
his own pit and saw himself faced with the awkward alterna- 
tives of deserting Sutekhu for Amon-Ra or declaring war. 
Probably he chose the latter solution, and the end of the 
manuscript celebrated his defeat. 

Very probably there is a foundation of historical fact in 
this legend which Maspero has so illuminatingly interpreted. 
It is reducible to this: the first serious resistance offered to 
the Hyksés of Avaris came from Thebes in the reign of 
Seqeninra. A mummy has been found belonging to a king 
of this name, and exhibiting five wounds on the head. It is 


* I quote here Maspero’s text, XX, vol. II, 74-75. 
17 


258 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


tempting to conclude that it is that of the Seqeninra of the 
tale, fallen gloriously on the field of battle.* 

The conflict thus begun did not cease. We possess the 
biography of a great captain of this epoch—Ahmes, son of 
Abana, a native of El-Kab. His father, he tells us, had been 
a soldier of King Seqeninra, and Ahmes himself had taken 
part in the sack of Avaris in the reign of King Ahmes I (who 
founded the XVIIIth Dynasty in 1580 B.c.). Consequently 
the war of independence must have begun about 1600. But 
a King Kames, who comes between Seqeninra and Ahmes I, 
played an important part in it. 

On a wooden tablet discovered at Thebes in 1908 by 
Lord Carnarvon a copy has beén preserved of a commemora- 
tive stele set up in a temple at Thebes by King Kames.* In 
the third year of his reign he took counsel with the great men 
of the South to discuss the perils of the situation. The 
Hyksés king of Avaris had made an alliance with the 
Nubians, who had been in revolt since the Asiatic invasion 
had broken the strength of the Egyptian monarchy ; he was 
in occupation of the whole valley as far up as Hermopolis 
and Cuse. ‘‘I wish to fight with him,’’ says King Kames, 
‘* and open his belly ; my will is to deliver Egypt and to slay 
the Asiatics!’? So Kames descended the Nile at the behest 
of the god Amon of Thebes. With the aid of the mercenaries, 
Mazoi, the Egyptian militia cut off the Asiatics from their 
base and forced them to give battle. ‘‘I spent the night on 
my ship,’’ says the king. ‘*‘ My heart was joyful. At dawn 
I swooped down upon the foe like a falcon. I overthrew him, 
I destroyed his entrenchments, I slaughtered his people, I 
forced his wife to come down to the bank (? as captive). My 
soldiers were like lions; of what they had taken—slaves, 
flocks, oil, and honey—they made a partition, with joy in 
their hearts. As for the rest of the hostile army, it was all 
in flight, men and horses.’’®? The result was the recapture 

1G. Maspero, XX, vol. II, 79. Another important historical consequence 
is this: the tradition makes Seqeninra the contemporary of Apophis the 
fourth Hyksés king of Manetho’s XVth Dynasty. It therefore admits that 
the XVth Hykséds Dynasty was contemporary with and parallel to the 
XVIIth Theban (see p. 252 above). 

2 See the study published by Gardiner, ‘‘ The Defeat of the Hyksés by 
King Kamose’”’ in XIII, vol. III, 95 #., and again in vol. V, 45 ff. 


8 This is the first time that the use of the horse is mentioned in an 
Egyptian text: it shows that the Hykséds had introduced it into Egypt. 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 259 


of Cusee and Hermopolis. The latter city, the domain of the 
god Thoth, was one of the great national sanctuaries of 
Egypt. The powerful clergy of Thoth had to put their 
wealth at the service of the national policy of the Thebans. 
And so the names of several kings at the beginning of the 
XVIIIth Dynasty are formed in such a way as to do homage 
to the deities of Hermopolis. Thoth and Aah (god of the 
moon) figure in the royal names Ahmes, Thothmes 
(Thutmes), and Ahhetep (queen).! 

Under Ahmes I, the immediate successor of Kames,’” 
(1580 B.c.), the Hyksés finally lost what of North Egypt was 
left to them. Captain Ahmes tells us that a ship in the 
Egyptian fleet was named “ The-Coronation (the rising)-in- 
Memphis ’’; that seems to mean that King Ahmes I, for the 
first time since the Asiatic invasion, had been able to cele- 
brate the traditional rites of coronation in Memphis. This 
town had, therefore, been retaken before the accession of 
Ahmes I; that can only have been the work of Kames. Well 
equipped with war-chariots taken from the Asiatics, and with 
ships, the Egyptian army advanced simultaneously upon the 
Nile and upon the plain; the principal event was the slege 
of Avaris. According to Manetho, Ahmes I had gathered 
480,000 men before the city, without, however, being able to 
storm it; the Hyksés obtained honourable terms and quitted 
the city with their wives, children, and riches, to return to 
Syria. The inscription of Ahmes, son of Abana, proves, on 
the contrary, that Avaris, attacked by land and water, was 
taken by the second assault. The inhabitants surrendered 
unconditionally and were led into captivity; as his share of 
the spoil Ahmes received a man and three women. Part of 
the garrison, however, succeeded in escaping to Palestine. 
Ahmes I pursued the refugees thither and laid Siege to a 
city, Sharohana, which was later to belong to the tribe of 
Simeon (Josh. xix, 16). The siege lasted three years because 
the Egyptian army was still inexperienced in attacking 
fortresses. Eventually the city was reduced by hunger and 
pillaged ; the population was divided among the victors. But 


* On a stele of King Ahmes I, the king’s subjects are exhorted to see in 
him ‘‘ the god upon earth” and to worship him like Horus and like Aah 
(Urk., IV, 20 and 18). He was under the protection of Thoth also (¢0., 19). 

* On this question, see Gardiner in XIII, vol. V, 47. 


260 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


King Ahmes did not venture to advance farther. He stopped 
short on the threshold of Asia. 

When “ the king had slain the Mentiu of Asia, he returned 
to the south to Nubia to destroy the Nubian Beduins,’’ who 
had been in alliance with the Hyksés. Once more it is 





Fic. 23.—ASIATIC PRISONERS AT THE PLOUGH (EL-KapB). 


Captain Ahmes who describes these expeditions, in which he 
took a glorious part, multiplying his deeds of bravery and > 
receiving as rewards “‘ the gold of valour,’’ slaves, and lands 
granted as military fiefs. He conducted against the Nubians 
‘the ships of the first two successors of King Ahmes I, Ameno- 
phis I and Thothmes I. In the latter’s reign the rebellion 












3 “an 


Fic. 24.—PRISONERS OF KUSH. 


was at length mastered. ‘* The hour came for the execution 
(of the culprits). Their people were deported in captivity, 
and His Majesty returned northward, grasping in his hand 
all the foreign lands, and (their chief) the wretched Beduin 
of Nubia fixed head downwards before the Falcon, His 
Majesty’s ship.’’* Nubia, reoccupied as far as Napata, was 


* Inscription of Ahmes, ll. 24 ff.; cf. Sethe, Urk., IV, 1=XVII, II, § 6. 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 261 


placed in charge of a viceroy with the title “‘ royal prince of 
Kush.’”? 

The gold mines were restored to working order and trade 
revived to its full activity. The fortresses were occupied, 
and splendid temples all along the Nile from Elephantine to 
Napata offered images of Amon and the Pharaohs to the 
adoration of their Nubian subjects. Thus a new Egypt 
developed, the civilization and art of which were at first 
purely Theban; but this character gradually degenerated 
under the influence of the neighbouring negro populations. 

Such were the results obtained by Thothmes I about 
1525 B.c. Egypt was delivered from the Asiatic invasions 
and re-established upon her southern frontiers. Despite 
dynastic quarrels (between Thothmes I, Thothmes III, and 
Queen Hatshepsut), what we know of the internal state of 
the country bears witness to the reign of order, material 
prosperity, and military and financial power. The Pharaonic 
monarchy, having recovered all its strength, proceeded to 
seek a solution of the Asiatic problem; for the capture of 
Avaris had by no means alleviated its gravity. 


II 
THe EGYPTIANS IN SYRIA 


The Hyksés, after the fall of Avaris, disappear from 
history ; neither as a military power nor a political organiza- 
tion had that barbarian empire survived the capture of its 
capital. But as an element in the population the invaders 
must have subsisted, mixed with Canaanites and Amorites, 
from the Euphrates to the Isthmus. The recent excavations 
in Palestine have, in point of fact, brought to light innumer- 
able scarabs of Hyksdés type which bear names and the spiral 
decoration characteristic of the times of the invasion. Yet 
many of these small monuments are posterior to the fall of 
Avaris : when the Pharaohs conquered Palestine such scarabs 
bearing their names continued to be manufactured till the 
middle of the XVIIIth Dynasty.? On the other hand, the 


+ The first known appear at the beginning of the reign of Thothmes I 
(Breasted, XVII, II, 61); Sethe, Urkunden, IV, 40, 1. 14. 
7 R. Weill, i fin du moyen Empire, II, 729 ff. 


262 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


Egyptian texts will often mention, among the Egyptians’ 
adversaries in Palestine and Syria, those heqau-khast from 
whom the name Hyksés comes. Does this name explicitly 
designate the former invaders or the Canaanites or the 
mixture of the two peoples? It is probable that after their 
military collapse the Hyksds (or at least the foreign elements 
which went to compose them) amalgamated with the Semitic 
population ; future excavations should throw some light upon 
this point. 

In the course of the two centuries corresponding to the 
invasion, Palestine and Syria had entered upon a period of 
urban development. The hieroglyphic and cuneiform docu- 
ments of the XVIIIth Dynasty introduce us to the ports of 
Gaza, Ascalon, and Joppa (Jaffa), and, on the plateau of the 
Shephelah, the cities of Sharohana, Hebron, and Jerusalem, 
in that region which was called Kharu.! The chain of Carmel 
formed the barrier between Kharu and Syria; Megiddo, a 
strong place of prime importance, guarded the passage. On 
the coast beyond opened the rocky ports of Zahi—Tyre, 
Sidon, Byblos, Simyra, and Arad. Each of them was a 
maritime fortress (menit) visited by coasting-boats, the ships 
of Byblos (kebentiu), those of Crete and the Hgean (keftiu), 
and those of Egypt. Between Lebanon (lmenen) and Anti- 
Lebanon, covered with cedars and pines, Cele Syria spread 
its orchards and wheat-fields, watered by the Jordan and the 
Orontes, flowing in opposite directions. Numerous small 
fortresses there gave shelter to the population of peasants. 

The most important strategic point was the deep depres- 
sion in which flows the Eleutheros (Nahr-el-Kebir), which 
opens a transverse route athwart the north of Lebanon from 
the port of Simyra to the oasis of Palmyra (depression of 
Homs). The intersection of this route with that along the 
Orontes was watched over by the ‘holy ”’ city of Kadesh, 
a citadel as important as Megiddo. To these very fertile 
valleys, connected on the right with the oases of Damascus 
and Palmyra, veritable ports on the sandy sea of the desert, 
the Egyptians gave the name of Upper Lotanu. Farther 


1 The geographical names in italics are those given in the Egyptian 
texts. On all questions relative to the geography and ethnography of 


Syria at the time of the Egyptian conquest, consult the classical work of 
W. Max Miller, Asten und Europa. 


263 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 


“aaIdNY NVIIGADY FHL JO ANI YT, AHL LV AIAOM IVINGTIO GHI—' A dv 











‘ é ee ae 
Sey Tt? ie Lk eA os te 
aN Taree is : ts pane y ass Ge $ 


Rowen ee Atos s 
See as z, ee NO TSed 
-~ -=-- Ysape 








PW) axC7 Q 






"A SOWADY a 


nant SIPARG 


IOAMHE |) -o®™ 
vinogyadv> oe y 
a, ~< may ae er. i 


Puozigaty 





adouig 


ANIXNG 


264 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


north between the Orontes and the Euphrates began the 
land of the two rivers—Naharina—with the cities of Khalep 
(Aleppo) and Tunep. They overlooked the outposts of the 
great citadel which commanded the Euphrates ford—Car- 
chemish, on the right bank of the river. Here the realm of 
Mitanni was established in the middle of the way of com- 
munication between Egypt and Babylonia and Anatolia. 
Before the Hyksés invasion, Naharina, with its partly Aryan 
population, separated the Hittites of Anatolia, the Semites 
of Babylonia and Assyria, and the Amorite and Canaanite 
Semites. After the invasion these diverse elements were 
submerged by the flood of invaders. In what condition of 
disintegration or of mixture had the ebb left them? We 
cannot say. Nevertheless, at the end of the sixteenth 
century Mitanni appears as the predominant State; its kings, 
heirs of the Hyksés empire, held in the palm of their hand 
the “Great Men’’ of Lotanu, and occupied the citadels of 
Carchemish, Kadesh, and Megiddo. 


The Pharaohs were well aware of this state of affairs. 
They had everything to fear from a fresh barbarian invasion 
or a counter-offensive by a State such as Mitanni. To ensure 
the security of Egypt in the face of a threatening or restless 
Asia Minor, only one tactic could be effective—the military 
occupation of the branch of the Fertile Crescent which leads 
from the Euphrates to the isthmus, and the establishment of 
a bridgehead at the extremity of the corridor of invasion— 
t.€., in this region of Naharina which is the glacis upon which 
the routes through Cilicia, Anatolia, and the Euphrates 
Valley converge. The Thothmes and Rameses understood 
this strategic necessity ; as soon as Nubia was pacified they 
made preparations for the occupation of Syria. History 
teaches that the Ptolemies, the Crusaders, Bonaparte, 
Mohammed-Ali, and even General Allenby himself in the 
last world war, obeyed one single necessity: it is always in 
Syria that great captains have defended the gates of Egypt. 

However, the desire for safety does not explain by itself 
the Egyptians’ counterstroke. War begets war, and the 
invasion by Asiatics had provoked in Egypt a national feel- 
ing of resentment which found expression in the inscriptions 
of the XVIIIth Dynasty. The hope of revenge, the taste for 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 265 


battle, the attraction of military glory, the lust for booty, 
prestige, rewards, and titles (decorations, honorary arms,’ 
slaves, and lands); such were the motives which animated 
the rising generations. See how the ship’s captain, Ahmes, 
introduces himself to posterity: ‘I give you to know the 
honours which have come to me. I have been rewarded with 
gold seven times in the sight of the whole earth and also 
with male and female slaves. I have been recompensed with 
very numerous lands. My name is that of a brave by reason 
of its actions, and it shall never disappear from the earth.’”* 





Fic. 25.—EGypTIAN INFANTRY UNDER THE XVIIITH Dynasty (DEIR EL-BAHARI). 


When Ahmes is speaking of Egypt’s soldiers, his comrades 
in arms, he says *‘ our soldiers,”’ “‘ our army.’”> This accent, 
in which pride is mingled with fraternal patriotism, will recur 
in the military narratives of the Thothmes; it is something 
quite new in Egypt, and is explained by the national exalta- 
tion. Such was the condition of mind of the troops; we can 
judge from it what the Pharaohs’ must have been like. They 
had in their hands all the means for a policy of conquest: 
soldiers, trained, eager, provided with perfect equipment 
(horses, chariots, ships), in which the shock-troops furnished 
by the Mazoi and the blacks of the Sudan were supported by 


+ The “‘ victorious soldiers’? of Egypt received as decorations rings, 
bracelets and necklaces of gold, honorific arms (axes and daggers), gold 
lions and flies, and gold hearts to be worn round the neck (Sethe, ‘ Alt- 
egyptische Ordensauszeichnungen ” in XII, vol. XLVIII, p. 143). 

“ Inscription of Ahmes, ll. 2-4; cf. Urk., IV, pp. 684, 780. 

® /bid., ll. 88, 81; cf. Annals of Thothmes III, 1. 75. 


266 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


the national infantry’ and by chariots mounted by picked 
young men of the upper class (Figs. 25-26), financial re- 
sources restored by the gold mines of Nubia and swelled by 
the products of Egypt’s fields and workshops, and an export- 
able surplus—wheat, cattle, and manufactured goods—to ex- 
change for the minerals of Asia. For all these reasons of 
a national, military, and economic nature the Pharaohs 
attempted, in their turn, to accomplish what the barbarous 
Hyksés had rudely outlined—the creation of an empire in 
which Egypt, united to the Near East, should be the mistress 
of the civilized world. 


After the recapture of Avaris, Ahmes I (1580-1554 B.c.), 
having occupied Sharohana, had made it a bridgehead for 
the coast of Palestine. That was enough to justify the in- 
scription on the walls of Karnak—* The foreigners (Khastiu) 
are all discouraged; for the king’s massacres (terrify) the 
Nubians, and his bellowings (resound) in the country of the 
Fenkhu (? Pheenicians).2 The fear of His Majesty is upon 
the interior of this earth like that of the god Minu, and so 
men bring him fine tribute. . . .” Nevertheless, Ahmes I 
had stopped there, and Amenophis I (1554-1588 B.c.) waged 
war only in Nubia. Thothmes I (1533-1501) also served his 
military apprenticeship there, but, considering the situation 
more threatening in Syria, he recalled his troops from Nubia 
to the eastern frontier and pressed them forward ener- 
getically. Without striking a blow the Egyptian army 
traversed the desert, the Shephelah, and Ccele Syria, and 
reached the banks of the Kuphrates. It was the finest 
military exploit that a Pharaoh had ever achieved. We have 
no official account of it, but the companions in war of 
Thothmes I did not fail to recount their deeds of prowess. 

It seems that the expedition encountered no resistance 
before Carchemish, with such glee does the old captain, 
Ahmes, describe it. ‘‘ After these events (the victory in 
Nubia) we passed into Lotanu to refresh our hearts in foreign 
lands. His Majesty went as far as Naharina, where His 

* What the texts of the Middle and New Kingdom call “ the live men of 
the army,” the citizen-soldiers, ankhu nu mshau ({uscription of Sebekhu 
of the XIIth Dynasty, above, p. 246); Zuscription of Kares, 1. 13, XIIIth 


Dynasty (Urz., IV, 48), 
* On the Fenkhu see above, p. 232, note 1. 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 267 


Majesty found this Wretched One and gave battle. His 
Majesty made great carnage amongst them; without number 
were the living prisoners whom His Majesty brought home 
as the result of his victories.’’' Another witness also places 
the battle in Naharina.* Thothmes I crossed the Euphrates, 
and on the east bank he set up a stele in his name,’ which 
bore witness to his triumph and seemed to advance the 





Fic. 26.—EGYPTIAN CHARIOT. 


frontiers of Egypt to that point. In any case, he, too, con- 
tented himself with a military demonstration. And so, 
having asserted the strength of his armies, he led them back 
to Egypt, leaving garrisons only in the south of Palestine. 
With what delirious enthusiasm did Egypt welcome the con- 
queror! An echo of it is still to be heard in the words of a 
stele discovered at Tombos on the Third Cataract in Upper 
Nubia. ‘‘ He has sat upon the throne of Horus,”’’ it is said 
of the king, ‘‘ to enlarge the frontiers of Thebes . . . that 
the Heriu-sha, the Khastiu who are abominable to god and 
the captive Haunebu may pay tribute unto her.*... All 
the foreign lands are united and bring their tribute unto His 
Majesty. He hath conquered the frontiers of the earth for 


" Ure., IV 36> XVII, 11,8 Si. * XVII, II, § 85. 

* According to the Azszals of Thothmes III (Urvz,, IV, 697; XVII, II, 
§ 478). 

4 That is to say, the Beduins, the Asiatics, and the people of the 
Mediterranean. 


268 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


his domain, and he who traverseth them with his victorious 
sword to seek a combatant shall find none to oppose him.”’ 

And so an Egyptian army had penetrated to the very 
heart of the country that had never been traversed hitherto, 
save by stray merchants or messengers! For the Egyptian 
people that was an almost fabulous adventure enlivened by 
picturesque and bizarre episodes. In Asia there were moun- 
tains with solid water, with snow, on their summits! And 
farther on there was a strange river, a sort of topsy-turvy 
Nile, which flowed southwards to reach the sea, while in 
Egypt you go down-stream to go north and up-stream to 
reach the south! ‘‘ He hath opened valleys unknown to his 
ancestors, and which the (kings) wearers of the Two Crowns 
had never seen. His south-eastern frontier is in this Nubia ; 
his north-western frontier is that inverted water which 
descends when it flows up-stream! Never had such a thing 
happened to the other kings of the North: and so his name 
is bruited abroad under all the orb of heaven. ... The 
oath is taken by his name in all lands because of the great- 
ness of his power. Never had that been seen in the annals of 
his ancestors since the Followers of Horus. ... He hath 
subdued the islands of the Great Ocean (shen-ur) : the whole 
earth is at his feet.’”! 

These emphatic eulogies, repeated in honour of the suc- 
cessors of Thothmes I, will become commonplaces, mere 
banalities of epigraphic style; here they are to be taken in 
their full sense in honour of the conqueror of Asia, and testify 
to the unaffected joy of a people intoxicated for the first time 
with military glory. How far the assertions affecting the 
Hau-nebu and the peoples of the isles are to be taken literally 
we do not know. It is at least certain that, in accordance 
with custom, all his neighbours in Asia and the islands sent 
Thothmes I presents,” which he transformed into ** tribute.’ 
The temples at Thebes were the first to benefit thereby. In 
the tomb of Inenj, an architect who lived at that time, 
reference is made to cedars imported from the Levantine 
ports and bronze from Asia, imported for the decoration of 
the great edifices’ erected as memorials of national thanks- 


1 Urk., IV, 82 f.; XVII, II, $8 67-73. 


? Jbid., 55; XVII, II, § 101. 
° 1bid., 56; XVII, II, §$ 103 #. 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 269 


giving in honour of Amon, the tutelary god of the victorious 
dynasty. 


It was not long before a reaction set in among the 
Khastiu against their new masters. Thothmes II returned 
to Lotanu and the Euphrates,’ and Thothmes III (1501- 
1447 B.c.) had to begin the conquest again from the begin- 
ning in the twenty-second year of his reign (1479). The 
Mitannians had fomented a general revolt from Syria to 
Palestine to such good purpose that the garrisons left by the 
Egyptians were expelled. ‘‘ There had been a long period of 
years [in which the Asiatics had ruled] by brigandage, every 
man serving their [princes who were in Avaris|]. But it 
happened in other times that the garrisons which were there 
were (? shut up) in the city of Sharohana. From the land of 
Yroza unto the confines of the earth a revolt was being 
prepared against His Majesty.’’? Then Thothmes III ‘* set 
out from the citadel of Zalu on his first victorious expedition 
[to repel those who had attacked] the frontiers of Egypt.’’ 

The complete account of this first expedition and the 
summary of the subsequent ones is known to us from the 
**king’s journals,’’? in which the scribes noted every day 
the incidents of the campaign. Inscribed on the walls of the 
temple of Amon at Karnak as an offering to the god to whom 
the credit for the war was given, this text forms the Annals 
of Thothmes III,* one of the most significant sources for 
Egyptian history, and the first journal of a great campaign 
which the world’s history has preserved. We will make large 
extracts therefrom; for no evidence permits of a better 
appreciation of the mentality of the Egyptian imperialists. 

Setting out from Zalu on April 19, 1479 B.c.,° the 
Egyptian army reached Gaza on April 28. It had taken 
nine days to cover the 146 miles of arid desert which 
separate the two cities, a speed which attests a perfect 


* Sethe, Untersuchungen, 1, 40; Breasted, XVII, II, § 125. 

* The interpretation of this fragmentary passage involves some uncer- 
tainties; cf. Sethe, XII, vol. XLVII, 84; Gardiner, XIII, vol. V, 54, note 2. 

S tire., TV, 693. X VIL, [lS 472. 

* Bibliography in Maspero, XX, vol. II, p. 256, note 1. I follow the text 
of Sethe, Urkunden, IV, 647 jf.; cf. Breasted, XVII, II, §§ 407-540. 

® All the Egyptian dates will here be translated into our modern reckon- 
ing for clearness in the narrative. 


270 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


organization. After one day’s rest the march was resumed, 
and on May 10 the army arrived at the foot of the pass which 
leads across Carmel to Megiddo. It had crossed 105 miles in 
eleven days without a battle, all the cities of the Shephelah 
having submitted. 

Before crossing the ridge, Thothmes III held a council of 
war and informed his generals that he had received reports 
about the enemy. ‘‘ Lo, this conquered wretch of Kadesh? 
has come and entered into Megiddo; he is there at this 
moment. He hath made a coalition with the princes of all 
the foreign lands that were in the waters (in obedience to) of 
Egypt, from Naharina, with the . . . the Syrians (Kharu), 
the Cilicians (Kedu), their horses,” their warriors, their men. 
In reply to what hath been related he hath said unto them: 
*I shall make me ready for [battle with His Majesty here] 
in Megiddo.” Now tell me what ye think thereof!’’? The 
generals reply with a discussion on the choice of routes which 
cross the ridge of Carmel. There are three roads; the most 
direct, which comes out by Aluna, gets gradually narrower 
and will force the army to march in single file, horse behind 
horse, man behind man. The vanguard will then be attacked 
before the body of the army has had time to deploy, since 
the enemy is waiting on the other side near the city of Aluna. 
But two other routes exist: one comes out on to the plain 
south of Megiddo, near Taanach; the other skirts Megiddo 
on the north. And so the generals urge the king “not to 
march on the (narrow) way which leads to the unknown.’’ 
At this moment fresh reports come to hand on the position 
of ** this conquered wretch.’’ 

Fortified by this information, Pharaoh spurns the caution 
of his generals. ‘‘ By my life,’’ said he, ‘*‘ My Majesty will 
proceed upon this road to Aluna. Let him among you who 
hath it in his heart march by the roads which ye have named, 
or let him among you who hath it in his heart march in 
company with My Majesty. But let it not be thought among 
these conquered ones whom Ra detests: ‘If His Majesty 

+ The prince of Kadesh and the prince of Megiddo were the heads of the 
coalition ; they were Amorites or Mitannians. 

* In all the military and diplomatic texts of the epoch horses are 
mentioned ; they represented one of the most important elements of a State’s 


strength. Men were still amazed at this ally newly introduced into Oriental 
civilization. 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 271 


proceed by another path, that is because he chanceth to be 
afraid of us! ...’ That is what they will think.” Then 
the generals agree: ‘‘ May thy father, Amon-Ra, do after 
thy heart. But as for us, we shall be the companions of Thy 
Majesty wheresoever thou shall’st go: for the servant’s place 
is behind his master.’’ Then His Majesty had word sent to 
all the soldiers that they would take the narrow way, and he 
swore a mighty oath: ‘‘I shall not allow my victorious 
soldiers to march ahead of me in this place.”? He had 
resolved in his heart to place himself at the head of his men, 
so that each of them might readily keep step in the march, 
horse behind horse.! 

Three days later—May 13—His Majesty’s tent was 
pitched at Aluna. On entering upon the straitened section 
of the defile, Thothmes took the head of the column, ‘‘ bear- 
-ing the image of his sire, Amon-Ra, which should open the 
way before him.”’ The first division of the army was accord- 
ingly under the patronage of Amon; apparently there was a 
second division marching, preceded by a statue of Herma- 
khis.* Pharaoh’s audacity was marvellously successful. For 
the enemy did not expect to see the Egyptians arrive by the 
more difficult route; the forces of the Prince of Kadesh were 
therefore drawn up in the plain on the side of Taanach. The 
Egyptians’ vanguard emerged without hindrance. Then the 
generals begged Pharaoh not to attack before the whole army 
had crossed the pass. ‘‘ May our victorious master hearken 
unto us this time! May our master protect the rear-guard 
of our soldiers with his troops. And when the rear-guard 
shall be free of the hills, then shall we fight these Khastiu, 
and our hearts shall not be anxious about our soldiers’ rear- 
guard.’’ His Majesty was reasonable; he awaited the arrival 
of the body of the army, which came out about midday, *‘ at 
the hour when the shadow turneth.”? About the seventh 
hour of the evening the army was drawn up facing Megiddo. 
The town’s garrison was keeping a close watch, while the 
coalition’s forces were still waiting to the south near 


* On all the questions raised by this narrative consult the very complete 
discussion given by H. H. Nelson, The Battle of Megiddo (Chicago, 1918), 
with numerous photographs showing the present state of the sites and roads. 

* See p. 315 below, where the army of Rameses II appears divided into 
four divisions each under the zgis of a deity. 


272 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


Taanach. The Egyptians were allowed to bivouac undis- 
turbed. An order was given out to the troops: ‘ Prepare, 
sharpen your arms; for we are going to advance to give 
battle to this conquered wretch to-morrow morning.’’ And 
while the council of war was in session in the royal tent, 
refreshment was served out to the officers, and loaves were 
distributed among the men. At the same time the password 
was sent round—*‘ Courage, courage! Watch, watch!’? In 








vy 
Y } ‘ 
} Aa 


If oe 






u 











& 
as 
> 





wy 


3 










“ays MallliMticcs nn Hla 


MOG 





wh, , 


= 
= 
= 
~ 
~ 
> 
= 
SS 
~ 


Sy s 
wh ns 
aw ny 





= 

= 

Vly AY 
MTT 


The three ways 







SAV Eats 
VYeyy nytt WIM Koz, 






ai 





1 


en Wier WIS 
DUAN Y BS Wyby 


f Np Ny Pie 
LLL . 
‘ 


After Breasted 






Maga uT] (0 paqtsanss> 






4, iti 
Mi’ 











Map VI.—THE DEFILE oF ALUNA AND MEGIDDO. 


the royal tent was the ‘‘ watch for life,’’ the headquarters 
post. Liaison officers came to give their reports to His 
Majesty : *‘ Our quarters are in good condition, the troops of 
the North and of the South likewise.’ 

Next day, May 14, the king rose at dawn, and marching 
orders were given to the whole army. His Majesty bran- 
dished his weapons from his chariot of electron, arrayed in 
his full panoply of war, like to Horus and Mentiu. The right 
wing was marshalled south of the city, in the ravine of the 
Kina, the left wing swung round to the north of the town; 
in the centre His Majesty with Ra strengthened all hearts. 

Unfortunately the account of the battle is abbreviated at 
this point. ‘Lo, His Majesty was mighty at the head of his 
soldiers, and when they (the enemy) saw His Majesty in his 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 273 


might, they took to flight towards Megiddo, falling over one 
another with panic in their eyes; and they abandoned their 
horses, their chariots of gold and silver. They were hauled 
up by their garments that they might be hoisted into the 
city over the walls; for the people of that town had closed 
(the city gates upon them). Ah! if only His Majesty’s 
soldiers had not given their hearts to plundering the pos- 
sessions of those vanquished foemen,! they would have taken 
Megiddo in that hour, while the defeated wretch of Kadesh, 
with the defeated wretch of that city, were being hastily 
hoisted over the city walls to bring them into the town. The 
fear of His Majesty had pierced their flesh; their arms were 
paralysed ; for His Majesty’s Ureeus had been mighty among 
them.’’? Then their horses and their gold and silver chariots 
were captured; as for the warriors, they were piled up like 
fishes in the corner of a net. ‘“* His Majesty’s victorious 
soldiers began to count their captures. The tent of that 
defeated wretch, all broidered with silver, was also taken.? 
All the soldiers began to shout aloud and addressed prayers 
of thanksgiving to Amon for the victories which he had given 
his son that day, and they also offered up prayers for His 
Majesty to exalt his victories. Then the booty that they had 
taken, in the form of (amputated) hands, of living prisoners, 
of horses, or of chariots of gold and silver adorned with 
paintings, was counted.”’ 


The battle was won, but the greater part of the hostile 
army had found refuge in Megiddo. And so Thothmes III 
did not give his soldiers’ ardour time to cool. Behold !”’ 
he said to them, “all the princes of these North countries 
which have rebelled are in the city. To take Megiddo is to 
take a thousand cities. Take it, then, vigorously !”’ It was, 
above all, important not to begin an interminable siege such 
as had been laid to Sharahona by Ahmes I. The Kgyptian 

* For a similar episode in the battle of Kadesh under Rameses II, see 
p. 318 below. 

* The victory of Thothmes III was therefore partly due to the magic force 
of the Ureus which guarded his brow; it is the might of the Ureus which 
constitutes the might of the king. 

* From another passage we learn that it was a tent of large size supported 
by seven posts adorned with electron (Urk., IV, 664). In this connection 
Nelson recalls the famous tent of Darius taken by Alexander the Great 
(0f. czt., p. 56). 

18 


274 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


army now possessed the necessary siege apparatus and troops 
specially trained in such operations. Megiddo was surveyed 
and surrounded with a wall of circumvallation buttressed 
with green timber (to protect it from the fire thrown by the 
enemy). The central point was a ‘‘ castle’? of solid walls, 
to which the promising name ‘* Menkheperra'-catches-the- 
Asiatics-in-his-net ’’ was given. A close watch was kept to 
prevent a sortie. ‘*‘ Orders were issued to allow none to pass 
beyond this wall except those who came to knock on the gate 
(to surrender).’? A detailed report of the siege was drawn 
up every day; this journal, copied on to a parchment roll, 
was later deposited in the temple of Amon. 

The garrison, overcome by famine, at last surrendered. 
‘- Lo, the princes of those lands came crawling on their bellies 
to kiss the ground before His Majesty and to implore the 
breath of life for their nostrils, (vanquished) by the strength 
of his sword and the greatness of Amon’s power over all 
foreign lands.’’ All the princes of the land defiled before 
him, loaded with their tribute of gold and silver, and followed 
by great and small cattle, and they were sent southwards to 
Egypt. Meanwhile Thothmes set reliable men in charge of. 
the conquered regions and ‘‘ recognized new princes in each 
citys? 

The scribes were hard put to it to draw up the list of 
the captured spoils. Their catalogue enumerates only 340 
prisoners taken alive, part of the garrison having already 
surrendered to escape the famine;* but there were 2,041 
horses, the gold-incrusted chariots of the princes of Megiddo 
and Kadesh and those of their followers—924 in all. The 
fine bronze war-helmets of the two defeated princes come in 
for special mention. The armament of the garrison was 
represented by 502 bows. In the country, moreover, the 
soldiers captured much cattle—1,929 oxen, 2,000 small goats, 
and 20,500 white sheep. The greed of the victors was not 
yet satisfied. ‘* The tilled fields of the territory of Megiddo 
were measured by controllers of the royal household for the 
harvesting of their crops. From them 207,300 bushels of 
grain were reaped, without counting what His Majesty’s 
soldiers had previously cut and carried off.’ 


1 Royal name of Thothmes III. * Urk., IV, 665: 
®* The account of the first campaign ends here. 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 275 


Several cities in the region, dependent on the Prince of 
Kadesh, made their submission. They delivered up their 
princes with their harems and their children, and also the 
warriors from Mitanni, probably Aryans, whom the Egyp- 
tians called the Merinau.: Al] these, with their slaves—2,503 
persons in all—were despatched to Egypt. They took with 
them great vases, “specimens of the work of the land of 
Kharu,”’ cups, gold plates, knives, gold and silver dises, the 
weight of which was estimated at more than 400 pounds, and 
also the furniture, armaments, ornaments, and robes of the 
Prince of Kadesh. 

Thothmes III pressed on northwards into (Upper) Lotanu 
—1.é., into the Orontes Valley—but he did not attack Kadesh 
in this first campaign. He contented himself with building 
a fortress in the heart of Lebanon, which he christened with 
the provocative name ** Menkheperra-enchains-the-Nomads 
(Shemau).’? Then “he returned to Thebes, where he cele- 
brated a great feast of victory on his return from his first 
victorious campaign to overthrow wretched Lotanu, to 
enlarge the frontiers of Egypt, in the twenty-third year.’”? 


Till the forty-second year Thothmes III returned annually 
to continue his warlike task and to drive the pike of Egypt 
deeper into the throat of the Asiatics, From the twenty- 
fourth to the twenty-ninth year the Egyptians made progress 
in Syria to the north of Megiddo (Lotanu), pursued the 
tribes (wht)® of the Asiatics, still half nomadic, catalogued 
the wealth of the land, especially the edible plants and 
domestic animals, a descriptive inventory of which was 
engraved on the walls of Karnak.’ The gardens of the coast 
and the Orontes Valley (Zahi) seemed enchanting to them. 
** His Majesty found the land of Zahi, the gardens whereof 
were full of fruits. Their wines were in the presses (over- 
flowing) like floods of water, and their grain grew on the 


* See Alan H. Gardiner’s note in his edition of the Pap. Anastasi, i, p. 
25, note 1. Winckler has found this name under the form martanna (in 
Vedic Sanskrit marya=young men, hero) in the tablets from Boghaz-Keui. 

2 Urk., IV, 789-40; XVII, II, §§ 548 #. SU, » 4 Vy Bike, 

* Mariette, Karnak, Pls, 28-31; among the fauna of Lotanu “ unknown 
fowls which lay every day” are mentioned (Urz., IV, 700). These are 
probably some gallinaceous birds; cocks or hens are very rarely seen 
depicted on the Egyptian monuments before the Hellenistic epoch. 


276 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


terraces (literally ladders) in such superfluity that it was 
more abundant than the sands of the beaches. His Majesty’s 
soldiers had an abundance of everything. ... And so His 
Majesty’s soldiers were drunken and rubbed down with oil 
every day, as is their fortune (only) on féte-days in Egypt.’”’ 
The army had already pressed on as far as Tunep and Khalep 
(Aleppo), strong cities between the Orontes and the Euphrates, 
and laid hands upon Arad and the coastal ports. And so 
Thothmes seized two(?) A®gean vessels, loaded with slaves, 
bronze, tin, emery, and various precious articles, and re- 
turned to Egypt by sea. 

Thereafter the reinforcements for the Egyptian armies 
arrived by sea. The ports (meniut) of the north coast (the 
future Phoenicia) were improved, equipped, and provisioned’ 
so as to serve as naval bases for the Egyptian squadrons and 
centres of commissariat for the troops operating in Zahi and 
Naharina. That meant a great saving in time and fatigue 
for the troops of Thothmes, who could now take the con- 
federates of Naharina on the flank without having to under- 
take the exhausting land journey from Zalu to the Orontes. 
And so the campaign of the thirtieth year (1472 B.c.) was 
decisive. 'Thothmes arrived before the walls of Kadesh, 
stormed the ‘‘holy city,’’ cut down its orchards, and 
pillaged its crops. This was the greatest success since the 
capture of Megiddo; no threat on the army’s rear any longer 
hindered the advance upon Naharina. In the thirty-third 
year Thothmes at last reached the great bend of the 
Euphrates in the district of Carchemish,*® the third great 
fortress which commands the passage of the great topsy- 
turvy Nile. The citadel was captured, the ford foreed, and 
Thothmes III ‘* planted another stele beside the stele of his 
father, Thothmes I, upon the eastern bank of that water. 
Then His Majesty embarked (upon the river) to take the 
cities and work the settlements of the tribes (whwt) of this 
conquered one of wretched Naharina.’’ The Mitannians fled 
before Pharaoh ‘‘ like a flock of goats.’’ 


1 Urk., IV, 687; XVII, II, § 462. 

* Beginning from the thirty-first year the Ammzals often mention the 
measures taken every year to equip the ports (Urk., IV, 692, 707, 713, 719, 
123, 727, 732). 

8’ The city is named in the /uscription of Amenemheb, one of the gallant 
captains of the Egyptian forces (Urk., IV, 891; XVII, II, § 583). 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 277 


Thothmes III reached the strategic position which 
dominates the whole of the “‘ Fertile Crescent.’? For the 
first time he found himself in contact with the great powers 
which in the future, sooner or later, were to be Egypt’s 
rivals; all sent him tribute. The Babylonian part of Upper 
Mesopotamia (Sangar) and Assyria (Assur) presented lapis 
lazuli and vases of wrought gold; “the great Hittite ’’ 
(Kheta) sent silver bracelets, a block of precious stone, and 
rare woods.’ Satisfied with this booty, not so much profit- 
able as honorific, Pharaoh returned, glad ‘‘to have en- 
larged the frontiers of Egypt.’? On his way he hunted in 
the forests of the land of Nii and “laid low 120 elephants 
for the sake of their tusks.’? All these spoils were shipped 
to Egypt in the coastal ports, which were well provided with 
vessels from Crete (keftiu) and Byblos (kebentiu) and Egyp- 
tian transports (sektiu).4 

But the Mitannians tenaciously resisted the Egyptians. 
In the thirty-fifth year (1467 B.c.) “* this wretched conquered 
one of Naharina reassembled his horses and his men from 
the confines of the earth, more numerous than the sands of 
the beach, to drag them to battle against His Majesty.’ 
They were utterly routed; tribute once more flowed in. In 
the forty-second year a general revolt in Lotanu imperilled 
the conquest of all the country north of Megiddo. The men 
of Naharina descended upon Tunep and Kadesh and involved 
all the Fenkhu in defection.° Thothmes III, starting from 
the coast, caught his enemies on the flank; he cut them off 
from Naharina, their northern base for supplies, by taking 
Tunep first of all. Then he led the militia up the Orontes 
and debouched upon the plain of Kadesh, where the rebels 
were concentrated. The two armies stood hurling defiance 
at one another when the Prince of Kadesh devised a 
strategem : he let loose a rutting mare and drove it in the 
direction of the Egyptian army, in the hope of exciting 


* A little later Cilicia (/sy) offered copper, tin, ivory, and lapis (Urz., 
IVS ZU). 

* Urk., 700 ff.; XVII, II, §§ 484 f. 

° Inscription of Amenemhebd, 1. 23; the captain saved Pharaoh’s life when 
he was attacked by a huge elephant (II. 24-25) 

* Urk., IV, 707; XVII, II, § 492. 

SOF. LV, 1102 XVII; II, § 498; 

* Urk., IV, 729; XVII, II, § 529. 


278 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


the stallions harnessed to the chariots and so disorganizing 
the good order of Pharaoh’s mounted troops. But the brave 
Amenemheb was on the watch; he rushed swiftly up to the 
mare, although he was on foot, and slit her stomach, carry- 
ing off her tail as a trophy to lay at the king’s feet. Then 
Thothmes led on his army ‘‘ to break the wall of Kadesh ”’; 
Amenemheb was the first to breach it." The victors cap- 
tured 691 warriors of Naharina with their horses. The 
coalition’s last effort was broken. It is at this point that 
Thothmes breaks off the recital of ‘‘ his victories from the 
twenty-second to the forty-second year, as it has been 
established in the temple of Amon ”’ (1460 B.c.).? 


Thus a century after the recapture of Avaris from the 
Hyksos the Theban Pharaohs had reconstituted ‘‘ Greater 
Eigypt’’ and conquered the western horn of the ‘“ Fertile 
Crescent’ of Asia. All the Oriental kingdoms, all the 
peoples of note on the continent or in the islands,* recog- 
nized their supremacy and paid them tribute. It may be 
imagined that Egypt was a trifle intoxicated. Here is how 
national and dynastic pride find expression on the famous 
triumphal stele* erected by Thothmes III in the temple of 
Karnak to commemorate the victories he had gained with 
the aid of his sire, the god Amon: 


‘“T have granted thee by decree,’”? says Amon to Thothmes III, ‘“ the 
earth in its length and breadth, the men of the West and the men of the 
East beneath the place of thy face. ... Thou has crossed the river of 
the great bend of Naharina in thy power and thy might.... I have 
granted that thy conquests should embrace all the lands ... and that the 
peoples should come loaded with their tributes to bow themselves before Thy 
Majesty. 

‘* I have come, I have granted thee to crush the princes of Zahi, I cast 
them beneath thy feet across the mountains. I have granted that they see 
Thy Majesty as a master of radiant splendour when thou shinest in my 
form in their faces. 

‘“T have come, I have granted thee to crush those who are in the land 
of Asia (Se¢zz), to break the heads of the Amu of Lotanu, I have granted 











1 Urk., IV, 894-5; XVII, II, §§ 589 ff. 

2 Urk., IV; 784; XVII, II, § 540. 

* After his last campaign Thothmes received tribute from Cyprus 
(Untinay), gold vases of Cretan workmanship (eftiu), and iron utensils 
(Urk., IV, 7883). 

4 Urk., IV, 611 #f.; Maspero, XX, II, 266 #.; XVII, II, § 658. 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 279 


that they see Thy Majesty robed in thy panoply (of war) when thou seizest 
thy arms in thy chariot. 

‘*T have come, I have granted thee to crush the Zast Land to invade 
those who are in the Land of the Gods (Punt, Abyssinia). I have granted 
that they see Thy Majesty like the Comet who rains down the heat of his 
flame and sprinkles his dew. 

‘“T have come, I have granted thee to crush the West Land, Crete 
(Keftz) and Cilicia (/s7), which cower in dread of thee. I have granted 
that they see Thy Majesty like a young bull, steadfast of heart, with sharp 
horns whom none may resist. 

‘“] have come, I have granted thee to crush those who are in their 
lands of Mitanni who tremble in terror of thee; I have granted that they 
see Thy Majesty like a crocodile, master of terrors in the midst of the water 
whom none can approach. 

‘“I have come, I have granted thee to crush those who are in the Isles 
(Creto-4Egeans), the peoples in the midst of the Very Green (Mediterranean) 
who are stunned by thy roaring, I have granted that they see Thy Majesty 
like the Avenger who raiseth himself on the back of his victim.? 

‘“T have come, I have granted thee to crush the Libyans (Zehenu), the 
isles of the U¢enau? which are in the power of thy souls, I have granted 
that they see Thy Majesty like a fierce-eyed lion, and that thou make 
corpses of them across their valleys. 

‘*T have come, I have granted thee to crush the most distant lands, the 
Great Circle (the Ocean), which is placed in the hollow of thy hand; I have 
granted that they see Thy Majesty lke the falcon, master of the wing, who 
conquereth with a glance what hath pleased him. 

‘*T have come, I have granted thee to crush ‘ those who are in front 
of the country,’ to take the Herzu-sha prisoners alive; I have granted that 
they see Thy Majesty like the jackal of the South, the master of movement, 
the runner who roveth over both lands. 

‘*T have come, I have granted thee to crush the /untiu, the Nubians, 
who to the bounds of their country are in thy hands. I have granted that 
they see Thy Majesty like the two brothers (Horus and Seth) whose arms I 
have joined to give thee the victory... .”’ 


III 
Ture ORGANIZATION OF AN EGYPTIAN EMPIRE 


The twenty years’ campaigning of Thothmes III gained 
for Egypt not only security, but also the hegemony in the 
Oriental world for a century, from 1460 to 1360 B.c. The 


1 An allusion to the Falcon Horus, which plants its talons in the backs of 
gazelles, typhonian animals. 

2 Hall (Oldest Civilization of Greece, p. 163) compares this name wtnaw 
with that given by the Assyrians to the island of Cyprus, ‘“‘ Yatnan.”’ Let 
us observe that the Libyans are here associated with the people of the Isles 
as will be the case again in the days of Rameses III. 

3 Sinai and Asia, which are in front of Egypt, in contrast to the Mediter- 
raneans, who are behind Egypt: Hau-nebu (the Egyptians faced south in 
taking their bearings). 


280 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


horn of the Fertile Crescent, which comprises Palestine, 
Coele Syria, and part of Naharina, constituted a province 
so closely bound to the metropolis that we may use the term 
Egyptian Empire to describe the political union of the region 
in obedience to a single master from the Upper Nile to the 
great bend of the Euphrates. 

For a century the Egyptian hegemony was maintained 
almost without armed intervention. The successor of 
Thothmes III, Amenophis II, repressed a revolt in Syria 
and pressed his troops into the heart of Mitanni in a three 
months’ campaign.’ Thothmes IV, too, came thither to 
marry the daughter of the King of Mitanni. Amenophis III 
(1415-1380) several times visited these provinces in Asia? and 
hunted the lion® there ; he found no other adversaries. Under 
his reign ‘‘ the peace of Egypt ”’ truly enriched Palestine and 
Syria. It was during the reign of Amenophis III and at the 
beginning of that of Amenophis IV (1880-1362 B.c.) that the 
Egyptian Empire attained its apogee. By a piece of singular 
good fortune, documents give us a satisfactorily minute in- 
sight into its administrative organization and political and 
economic aims. Some 800 bricks, inscribed with cuneiform 
characters, were accidentally discovered in 1887 among the 
ruins of the capital of Amenophis IV—Akhetaten, to-day 
Tell-el-Amarna. Decipherment proved that these documents 
were none other than the archives of the Department of 
Foreign Affairs of the Pharaohs. They included, in the form 
of copies or minutes, letters addressed to Amenophis III and 
Amenophis IV by the kings of Babylon, Alasya, and Mitanni, 
and by the princes of Palestine or Syria, and also some 
replies from the Pharaohs or the Egyptian governors. A 
surprising thing is that the despatches of the Syrian princes 
and the Egyptian administrators are written in the Baby- 
Jonian language and script. On the other hand, non-Semitic 
dialects like the Mitannian are there also, written in the 
cuneiform characters. So there was in those days a diplo- 


1 XVII, II, § 784. 

2 XVII, II, § 817. 

* A scarab engraved on a large number of specimens tells us that the king 
killed 102 lions during the ten years of his reign; cf. XX, vol. II, p. 298, 
and XVII, II, § 865. 

* XXVII, 49 #.: ‘* Diplomatie pharaonique.”? The principal editions of 
these latter are those published by Winckler and Knudtzon. 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 281 


matic language current throughout the civilized East, and 
that language was Babylonian. 

More recent finds have brought to light more diplomatic 
and administrative correspondence from Taanach in the land 
of Canaan,! and from Boghaz-Keui, the Hittite capital.* 
There, too, the cuneiform writing alone was used, or formed 
the chief medium of communication, side by side with a rude 
pictographic script. These archival documents of diverse 
provenance mutually supplement one another and illuminate 
world politics in the fifteenth and fourteenth centuries before 
our era. For the first time in the world’s history we are in 
possession of texts relating to the same events, but derived 
from opposing sides; they allow us to check the evidence of 
questionable sincerity emanating from official history, from 
the laudatory inscriptions engraved in honour of the 
Pharaohs or their god Amon. 

We will divide the analysis of these texts into two parts: 
first, those concerning the Asiatic provinces immediately 
subject to the Pharaohs; secondly, those referring to the 
great neighbour kingdoms. 


The Egyptian provinces in Asia included Palestine and 
Syria up to a northern frontier, which we cannot define, but 
which did not overstep the spurs of the Taurus, between the 
Amanus Mountains and the Euphrates. The occupation of 
this region, which commands the whole of the military and 
commercial route from Asia to Africa, gave strategic security 
to Egypt. There Thothmes III had crushed all resistance by 
his campaigns repeated over twenty years. On the testimony 
of his Annals, he had not failed to pillage the country, to 
hold the inhabitants to ransom, or carry off to Egypt the 
best products of the fields and workshops after each expedi- 
tion. But once pacification had been achieved by fire and 
sword, the Egyptian conquest was merciful and beneficent. 
Amenophis III seems to have cherished the ambition of 
making Palestine and Syria provinces attached to Egypt, 
not only by force of arms, but still more by community of 
political and commercial interests. 

1 Dr. Sellin’s excavations published in the Denkschriften des k. Akad. der 


Wiss. Wien, III (1906). 
2 Vide infra, p. 8038. 


282. FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


In Palestine and Syria the Pharaoh’s sovereignty was an 
accomplished fact. The kings of Babylon, the former 
masters of the country, did not dare to challenge it. ‘* The 
land of Palestine is thy land; its kings are thy vassals,”’ 
wrote Burnaburiash to Amenophis IV. The city of Tunep, 
in the heart of Naharina, described itself as *‘city and 
servant ”’ of the Pharaoh.? However, the Pharaoh did not 
exercise his power directly; he utilized the political organs 
found in the country by the Egyptians, which were varied. 

In the towns of the Shephelah, and on the Syrian coast 
at Tyre, Sidon, and Byblos, the Amarna letters mention 
“city chiefs,” called khazani; they call themselves ‘the 
king’s men,”’ and sometimes bear the name ‘“‘ king,’’ some- 
times other titles. They were not Egyptians; their patro- 
nymics indicate natives, representatives of the old Semitic 
families of the country.” Occasionally Aryans (the M erinau, 
p. 275 above) and Asianics?® appear among these Semites, 
marking fresh and recent infiltrations of foreigners into 
Canaan. In some towns, such as Arad and Tunep, we find 
neither kings nor khazani, but a council of notables; they 
were therefore miniature republics. The Pharaohs had 
accordingly made use of such directive authorities as existed 
in the countries, but they had taken the precaution of 
Egyptianizing them. After the capture of the great cities 
of Lotanu, Thothmes III deported ‘‘ the sons and brothers of 
the great men to incorporate them in the Egyptian forces. 
And if one of these great men came to die, His Majesty would 
send his son to replace his father.’?> The Syrlan princes 
brought up in Egypt and initiated into the civilization and 
administration of the Pharaohs, therefore formed a nursery 
of khazani and kinglets for Kharu and Lotanu. In the same 
way the Cesars devoted their attention to educating in 
Roman manners the sons of German chiefs, and modern 
colonial Powers have not acted differently towards the heirs 
of the great native families of India or Africa. 

The local chiefs administered the country directly; their 
cities belong to them, say the Amarna letters. It was the 
native troops who had to ensure public order and the free 

1 XXVII, pp. 68 and 70. > XXVII, 60 7. 


* Below, p. 290. * XXVII, 61. 
° Urk., 690 (1. 10); XVII, II, §§ 467, 434. 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 283 


transit of caravans and shipping. Pharaoh only occupied 
with his forces a few strategic points—the fortresses con- 
structed by Thothmes III to dominate Megiddo' and Kadesh. 
We may perhaps suppose that permanent Egyptian garri- 
sons were planted at Carchemish and in the ports which 
served as bases for Pharaoh’s armies, but in the rest of the 
country the native levies were sufficient, provided they were 
supported by a few Egyptian archers or chariot fighters. 
The khazani often appealed for military support, but the 
numbers of effectives demanded were not excessive. The 
Government of Megiddo solicited the despatch of two archers, 
that of Tyre asked for twenty, that of Byblos for four with 
twenty chariots. If the matter was particularly ticklish, the 
figure might rise to 200.7. These Egyptian soldiers certainly 
played the réle of instructors and served as cadres for the 
native troops, a procedure which is still applied in the case 
of our own colonial armies. The maintenance of these nuclei 
was a charge upon the khazanu, who provided provisions for 
every body of troops despatched, for every messenger, for 
every officer of Pharaoh. 

To these charges, which constituted a sort of military 
service, must be added the annual despatch of products of 
the country—cereals, fruit, wines, oil, honey, domestic 
animals, oxen, goats, and sheep, in the case of agricultural 
regions; elsewhere bears and lions, which were exhibited in 
Egypt; in the case of Lebanon, building timbers,’ metals in 
the form of ore (copper, gold, or silver), as ingots or as 
products of the smithy, especially vases and utensils, among 
which the Palestinian workmanship of Kharu and the Syrian 
of Zahi were distinguished,* rare stones, ivory, lapis lazuli, 
malachite, emery, firestones, precious essences, incense, 
spices, and human labour-power (slaves and workmen). All 
that Thothmes III enumerates among the spoils of his 
campaigns flowed to Egypt as an annual tribute, secured by 
written contracts with the khazani and the cities of Kharu, 
Zahi, and Lebanon, and loaded every year in the ports of 
Pheenicia.° 

A further distinctive mark of the situation of the cities or 

1 See pp. 273 and 275 above. 2? XXVII, 64. 


3 XVII, II, § 436 (Urz., 66). ‘ XVII, II, § 509 (Urz., IV, 718). 
5 XVII, II, § 483 (Urz., IV, 700). 


284 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


princes in the Asiatic provinces in their relations with Egypt 
is that they correspond with Pharaoh directly without any 
intermediary. The letters were composed in accordance with 
an official formula, the outlines of which were followed with 
the minimum of deviation. In the opening paragraphs ex- 
pressions of humble servility are piled up: “To the king, 
my master, my god, my sun, there is said this: I, khazanu 
of the city of X, thy servant, the dust of thy feet, and earth 
which thou treadest, seat of thy throne and stool for thy feet, 





= Re = — 2 sits 
ree Vinge = 3 Lar 

Cd 
i N cia ; 


SS 
Fic. 27.—CANAANITES AND THEIR TRIBUTE. 


One of them is Carrying an elephant’s tusk, the other a copper ingot of 
Cypriote type. 


shoe of thy horses, I roll me seven times on my belly and on 
my back’ in the dust at the feet of the king, my lord, sun 
of the heaven. . . .”? Then the correspondent defines his 
essential duty: ‘*I am the king’s servant, his house-dog, J 
guard all the land of X for the king, my lord.’”? Next, when 
all is well, come invariable phrases : ** The country is in good 
condition, the king’s orders are obeyed, the tribute is des- 
patched regularly to Egypt.’’? When a difficulty arises, the 
letter sets forth all the details. 

Pharaoh’s answers, too, were drawn up in accordance 
with invariable formule : ** Attention! Guard the king’s 

* The Egyptian bas-reliefs do actually show Syrian nobles crawling on 


their bellies or their backs; c/. Breasted, XVI, Fig. 147. 
2 XXVII, 61. 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 285 


city which is under thy authority! . . . The king hath sent 
to thee X, who is the king’s commissar in the land of Canaan. 
What he saith unto thee, hearken well thereto, that the king 
find thee not remiss. ... Attention! Be not forgetful! 
Prepare food in great quantity, wine and all things for the 
king’s troops.’? And the concluding sentence sounds like a 
haughty fanfare : ‘* Know that the king is like the sun in the 
heavens and that his troops and numerous chariots are in 
very good condition.’”* 

Thus Pharaoh busied himself with the affairs of Syria as 
with those of Egypt. The correspondence was prepared, the 
files studied, solutions to the problems worked out by the 
scribes of the Foreign Office staff, but in 
many cases the king went into an examina- 
tion of the case in person. Sometimes he 
summoned the Syrian princes to Egypt to 
secure fuller information. More often he 
entrusted the supervision of the execution 
of his orders to royal messengers. These 
are called, in the Amarna letters, Rabizu 
(minister), while the Egyptian texts style 
them sometimes, like Thutii, ‘‘ the director 
of all the foreign lands, he who satisfies the 
king’s heart in every country and in the - 
isles in the midst of the sea,’’ or, as in Pir ieee 
the case of Amenemheb, “‘ the mouth of the Canaanrre Kuazanv. 
king, the eyes of Horus, the ears of the king 
of the North, the companion of the king, he who is attached to 
his legs on land and sea and in all the foreign countries.”’? The 
Amarna letters give the names of some of these messengers, 
who were often great personages—viceroys of a sort® or com- 
missars with limited jurisdiction. They inspired great awe 
and intervened vigorously in difficult cases, but always with 
the obligation of referring the matter to Pharaoh.* Pharaoh’s 
messengers contributed largely to Egypt’s renown in the 
Oriental world; popular literature made them into heroes 
of romance® and endowed them with supernatural powers. 





1 According to a tablet preserved in the Louvre and published by F. 
Thureau-Dangin in the Recueil Champollion (1922). 

2 Urk., LV, 899: 77. 3 Vide infra, p. 305. 

4 XXVII, 63. 

5 For instance, the moar of the Papyrus Anastasi, XXVII, 86. 


286 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


Thus, according to an Egyptian story, Thutii recaptured the 
town of Joppa when it had rebelled, thanks to a clever 
strategem and the superstitious dread inspired by the cane 
of Thothmes III, which Thutii kept by him as a talisman.? 

Whatever authority the messengers enjoyed, they did not 
always succeed in settling the disputes. As may easily be 
imagined, conflicts were frequent among a mercantile and 
litigious population of varied origin. Khazani and the petty 
kings of the Egyptian provinces regarded one another with 
jealousy and were constantly at loggerheads. They appealed 
again and again to Pharaoh’s messengers and officers. The 
latter only interfered in the last extremity, sometimes leaving 
as many as twenty letters unanswered,’ perhaps with studied 
indifference. Rivalry between the princes and towns which 
tended to be over-free was all in Pharaoh’s interest; the 
equilibrium in Egypt’s favour would be maintained thereby. 

It is clear that the Egyptian administration of Asia 
economized in soldiers and expenses. It deliberately left 
to the populations a degree of independence. The political 
status and usages of each city and country were respected of 
set purpose; there was no oppression of the vanquished by 
the victors, not even in the religious sphere, as we shall 
Shortly see. Pharaoh contented himself with an effective 
oversight which ensured order and peace for the military 
security and economic prosperity of Syria as much as of 
Egypt. In fact, we have here a case of the system of pro- 
tectorates; for the first time in the history of the East we 
see its beneficent effects following the brutal conquests, the 
thoughtless raids, the Systematic massacres, the mass depor- 
tations, which to the Semites, nomadic or sedentary, had 
been, and too often will be, the only way of treating 
vanquished peoples. 


Pharaoh’s diplomacy was not bounded by the frontiers of 
Syria. Amenophis III and IV maintained constant relations 
with the great realms in Asia, which the Amarna corre- 
spondence has revealed to us. The letters belong or are 
addressed to the Kings of Babylon, Assyria, and Mitanni, 
the Great Hittite, and the King of Isi or Alasia. They 
employ a fixed set of formule stamped with reciprocal 


* Maspero, Contes, 297. ? XXVII, 70. 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 287 


courtesy, which attests the existence, already old and con- 
ventional, of a *‘ language of diplomacy ”’ the terms of which 
have endured almost unchanged to the present day. More- 
over, the titular formule are very varied and infused with 
many shades of meaning, so that the reader can acquaint 
himself with the degree of power or dependence, as compared 
with Pharaoh, enjoyed by each correspondent. 

What attitude in relation to Egypt is adopted by the 
kings of Babylon, heirs of the former Semitic Empire? 
Eleven letters from Tell-el-Amarna enlighten us. M. Dela- 
porte gives a detailed analysis of them in his book, Mesopo- 
tamia ;' here we shall only insist upon a few essential points. 

The kings of Babylonia (which was called at this epoch 
the kingdom of Karduniash) belonged to the Kassite dynasty, 
which had been able to impose itself on Babylonia without 
restoring her to her political and military power. They un- 
questioningly admit Egypt’s suzerainty over that Canaan 
and that Syria which Hammurabi had once conquered; they 
even pride themselves on having refused to associate them- 
selves with Canaanite rebels against Pharaoh. Look at what 
Burnaburiash writes to Amenophis IV: ‘* In the time of my 
father, Kurigalzu, a king of Canaan sent to tell him by a 
messenger: ‘ Let us enter into the city of Karmishat, let us 
march against Pharaoh by common accord!’ My father sent 
to say unto him as follows: ‘ Renounce all plans for an 
understanding with me; if thou wishest to treat the King of 
Egypt as an enemy, seek another ally. As for me, I will 
never go; I will never ravage his land, for he is my ally.’ ’” 

These political bonds Pharaoh wished to tighten by ties 
of blood—marriage alliances. Amenophis III had married 
Kadashman-Enlil’s sister. Later he asked for the hand of 
the same king’s own daughter. The latter refused because 
he had never had any news of his sister. ‘* How doest thou 
demand my daughter in marriage, when my sister whom my 
father hath given thee is there in thy house and no man hath 
seen her. Is she now alive or dead?’’? Pharaoh replied that 
it was the messengers’ fault if the Kassite king was ull- 
informed; but he had difficulty in convincing his corre- 
spondent, all the more that he resolutely refused him the 
like favour which he brusquely demanded—the despatch for 


1 Esp., pp. 46 7. 2 Winckler, letter 7. 


288 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


his harem of an Egyptian princess. Of that refusal Kadash- 
man-Enlil complains bitterly : ‘* When I demanded the hand 
of thy daughter, thou hast replied saying: ‘ Never hath the 
daughter of the King of Egypt been given to anyone.’ When 
these words were reported to me, I have sent to say to thee 
what followeth : ‘ If thou sendest her me unwillingly, I prefer 
that thou send her not at all. Thou bearest not a brother’s 
affection for me. When thou hadst made me privy to thy 
intention to consecrate an alliance between us by marriage, 
I have replied thereto with all the goodwill of a brother. 
And now, my brother, when I express to thee the desire 
to ally us by marriage, why dost thou refuse me thy 
daughter ?’ ’” . 

In default of wives, Pharaoh sent the Kassites gold; for 
them that was the price of their humiliation. The kings of 
Babylon ceaselessly clamoured for the red metal with which 
the inexhaustible supplies of Abyssinia, Etbaye, and Punt 
ever filled the Egyptian treasury. **They claimed it by 
virtue of regular commercial agreements annexed to the 
marriage treaties. All these Semitic kings of Babylon, 
Assyria, and Canaan were far-sighted merchants and clever 
industrialists who did their best to encourage the metal- 
lurgical industries which had long flourished in their realms. 
In the hands of tribute-bearers in the Theban temples and 
tombs we see the very remarkable products of the Syrian 
and Chaldean workshops; these are vases of gold, silver, and 
bronze, table-covers decorated with motives copied from the 
Asiatic fauna or flora, artistically chiselled arms, elephants’ 
tusks, furniture, stuffs, and jewels ’’ (Fig. 27). 

Apparently the goldsmiths lacked good quality metal. 
Egypt could supply it, and cheaply, too, when Pharaoh was 
willing. And so the kings of Asia had gold imported from 
Egypt, which they had transformed into works of art and 
re-exported to Pharaoh, taking a commission. They were 
very careful to claim their rights and not to allow themselves 
to be deceived as to the quality of the wares supplied. ‘* The 
messenger whom thou hast sent me,’’ writes Burnaburiash, 
**is the bearer of twenty mine of imperfect gold, which, put 
in the crucible, have not even yielded five mine of pure 
gold... .’ Or again: ** The gold ingots which my brother 


1 Knudtzon, letter 4; cf. AXVII, 77-81. 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 289 


had not examined, when sent to the crucible to be melted, 
were returned to me, and the smelter would not accept 
them. ...’' It is true that the kings of Karduniash sent 
back, in their turn, caravans loaded with presents—for 
instance, to bear to Pharaoh the dowry of the Kassite prin- 
cesses. All too often these caravans were rifled on the way, 
despite the passports or letters of introduction addressed by 
the King of Babylon “to the kings of Canaan, the vassals 
of my brother, the great King (of Egypt),”’ requesting them 
not to hinder or despoil his messengers, loaded with gifts for 
Pharaoh, on the road.? 

Relations with the kings of Assyria were less intimate. 
However, Pharaoh wrote to them directly, although they 
were in theory vassals of Babylon. Burnaburiash protests 
against such encroachment upon his rights as sovereign, and 
warns Pharaoh not to put his trust in this small people, crafty 
and ambitious, who were concentrating their forces and pre- 
paring for a great destiny. ‘The King of Assyria,’’ wrote 
Burnaburiash, “is my vassal. I need not tell thee why he 
has come to ask for thy friendship. If thou lovest me, let no 
treaty be made between you; keep him at a distance.’? But 
it was in Pharaoh’s interest to keep a balance between his 
neighbours and conciliate the young people of the future as 
much as the old people, rich, above all, in their past. A 
letter from the King of Assyria informs us that written 
agreements between Egypt and himself were in existence ; 
he, too, demands a present of Egyptian gold. 


Mitanni, the dynasty whereof had been planted on the 
central strategic point of the Fertile Crescent, was also the 
centre of diplomatic intrigue at this epoch. The Mitannians 
had apparently been the most stubborn force in the amor- 
phous mass of the Hyks6és, and then the nucleus of the 
coalition of Syrian kings against Thothmes III; it was 
principally with them that the latter fought with fury for 
twenty years. But unexpected circumstances supervened to 
incline Mitannians and Egyptians to a mutual alliance. 

Towards the middle of the fifteenth century the vanguard 
of a fresh and formidable invasion of the Crescent by Asianic 
peoples appeared on the horizon. The letters mention the 


1 XXVII, 81-83. * Hall, XIX, 265. 
19 


290 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


presence of Lukki, Shakalasha Shardana, and Danezans in 
Syria,’ the advance-guard of an irresistible invasion which 
ran its course in two stages—at the beginning of the reign of 
Rameses II (about 1300 B.c.) and in the time of Rameses III 
(about 1200). Through the recoil the Hittites of Anatolia 
and Cilicia shifted southwards and began to press upon the 
northern and western flanks of Mitanni. At about the same 
time on the eastern flank the realm of Assyria was becoming 
dangerous. Caught between these two adversaries, Mitanni 
saw her strength and influence waning as her rivals and 
neighbours progressed. About 1445 B.c. Amenophis II com- 
pleted the conquests of Thothmes III and invaded Mitanni. 
** The great men of Mitanni came to him with their tribute 
on their backs, to beg of His Majesty the sweet breath of life. 
That was a great event such as had not been heard of since 
the days of the gods, when this country which had never 
known Egypt made supplication to the Good God ”’ (Ameno- 
phis II). Thereafter a new dynasty appeared (with King 
Shaushshatar) in Mitanni, perhaps imposed upon that country 
by the Pharaohs; its policy was based upon a close alliance 
with Egypt, reinforced by treaties, marriages, and commer- 
cial agreements. To this policy, which lasted till the end of 
the XVIIIth Dynasty, Egypt owed the tranquillity of her 
empire in the days of Amenophis III, and Mitanni the 
security for existence over against the Hittites and 
Assyrians. 

The letters which the King of Mitanni, Dushratta, ex- 
changed with Amenophis III and Amenophis IV are the 
most valuable element in the Amarna correspondence. 
Scarcely twenty years have elapsed since the time when 
Thothmes IV boasted of crushing the ‘‘ conquered wretch ” 
of Mitanni. Now Pharaoh pertinaciously woos the daughters 
of his ‘* old and wretched foe’’; he is pursuing a policy of 
Mitannian marriages. Thothmes IV wrote to Shaushshatar’s 
successor, Artatama, to ask for the hand of his daughter; 
the latter only agreed to the marriage after seven successive 
messages had reached him. And so the Mitannian princess 
did not receive the ordinary welcome accorded to foreign 
princesses—the daughters of the King of Babylon, for 


1 Hall, XIX, 260; XIII, vol. VII, p. 40. 
2 Inscription of Karnak, XVII, II, § 804. 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 291 


example. Not only did she enter the royal harem, but she 
became the great royal wife, the Queen of Egypt, under the 
name of Mutemuia: the Amarna letters state explicitly! that 
Artatama’s daughter was the mother of Amenophis III. And 
so the great Egyptian ‘‘ emperor ’’ had been an Aryan on his 
mother’s side. That is a fact of the utmost importance,’ 
which will explain the close union between Egypt and 
Mitanni and the pro-Asiatic policy of Amenophis III and IV. 

Moreover, Amenophis III of deliberate choice renewed 
this blood alliance; although he had already made Tii, 
daughter of a ** sheik of Zahi’’® his queen, he married Giluk- 
hipa, Dushratta’s sister, whose hand was granted him after 
requests six times repeated. And at the end of his reign he 
espoused Dushratta’s daughter,‘ Tadukhipa, whose betrothal 
was the object of negotiations reported in full in the Letters. 
** Pharaoh sent an ambassador extraordinary, named Mani, 
the bearer of presents and a royal letter composed in the 
following terms: *‘ What I send thee at the moment, it is 
naught, but if thou grantest me the wife whom I desire, 
presents will come (in greater numbers).’ Dushratta received 
the ambassador, and, having accepted the presents, sent this 
reply to the royal suitor: ‘ A great friendship united thy sire 
and me; now I shall feel even greater affection for thee, his 
son.’*’ Tadukhipa set out for Egypt under the charge of the 
Kgyptian ambassador, accompanied by a “* household ”’ com- 
posed of several hundred Mitannian ladies and a “‘ chapel ”’ 
for the worship of her national gods. When the health of 
one of these princesses became imperilled, a statue of the 
goddess Ishtar was sent to Egypt, which brought to the 
exile the help and blessing of her country’s gods. Relations 
between the two royal families were extremely affectionate. 
Dushratta, hearing of the death of Amenophis III, wrote to 
his son, Amenophis IV, in these terms: ‘‘ When thy father 


1 P. Jensen in XII, vol. XXVIII (1890), 114; c#. Erman, 77d., 112. 

* It is admitted by Breasted, XVI, 328; and by Hall, XIX, 254; but 
denied by Maspero, XX, vol. II, 295, n. 2. The testimony of the Letters 
is, however, irrefutable; Amenophis’ mother was Artatama’s daughter. 

* This title is given to Tii’s father on a cup published by Hall in XIV, 
vol. XXXV (1913), p. 63, but the genuineness of this little monument is 
disputed. 

* On this subject, see Evetts’ article in XII, vol. XXVIII, 118. Tadukhipa 
then passed into the harem of Amenhotep IV. 


292 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


was going to die, on that day I wept and I fell sick and I was 
going to die... (but I learned of the accession) of the 
eldest son of Amenophis and Tii . . . and I said: ‘ Ameno- 
phis is not dead!’ ”’ 

Such sentiments were not incompatible with an eye to 
business. Look how Dushratta, at the same time as he con- 
ceded his daughter’s hand, demands gold, gold: 


‘““To Nimmuria (Amenophis III), the great king, the King of Egypt, my 
brother, my son-in-law, who loves me and whom I love, Dushratta, the great 
king, thy father-in-law, who loves thee, the King of Mitanni, thy brother. 
All is well with me. With thee may all be well, for thee with thy house, 
my sister and thy other wives, thy sons, thy chariots, thy horses, thy 
captains, thy country, and all thy possessions ! 

‘““In the days of thy fathers they were on terms of friendship with my 
fathers, but thou hast increased yet more this friendship and with my father 
thou hast been on most friendly terms. But, to-day, since thou and I are 
on terms of mutual friendship, thou hast made the bond ten times more 
close than with my father. May the gods make our friendship prosperous, 
may Teshub and Amon ordain for ever that that remain so. 

‘““As soon as my brother has sent his messenger Mani to say: ‘My 
brother, send me thy daughter to be my wife and queen of Egypt,’ I have 
not been willing to wound the heart of my brother and I have ever ordained 
what was friendly. And after my brother’s desire I have presented her to 
Mani and the latter has seen her and has been greatly rejoiced thereby. 
When he has brought her safe and sound to my brother’s land, may Ishtar 
and Amon grant that she satisfy my brother’s desires. 

‘“‘ But I have demanded from my brother a great quantity of gold, say- 
ing : ‘ More than my brother has sent to my father, let him give and send to 
me.’ Now, thou hast sent to my father a great quantity of gold and thou 
hast sent to me only one tablet of gold. ... Oh! let my brother send me 
gold in great quantity without counting it and more gold than he has sent 
to my father. For in my brother’s land gold is as common as dust.’’? 


The rapprochement between Egypt and Mitanni could 
not be agreeable to the Hittite ‘‘ great king,’? Shubbiluliuma. 
A contemporary of both the Amenophis, he was to carry 
through great designs against Egypt after their deaths. 
However, two letters from Shubbiluliuma to Amenophis IV 
exist in which reference is made to a treaty between the 
Hittite king and Amenophis III.. Nevertheless, these letters 
are curt and dry; they announce the despatch of silver 
objects and two rare trees and demand other presents in 
exchange.” 


On the west, from the coasts of Cilicia to the island of 
Cyprus, extended the realm of Alasia (or Isi), a coastal and 


1 Winckler, letter 17. * Knudtzon, letters 41-42; cf. XIII, vol. VI, 203. 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 293 


insular zone in which the Pharaohs sought allies and partners 
for their maritime trade. Cyprus is the land of copper, and 
so the Letters indicate a brisk import trade in Cypriote 
copper into Egypt. In the Theban tombs we see a procession 
of men carrying these ingots or pigs of the metal, the charac- 
teristic rectangular form of which is exactly that of the actual 
** pigs *? found in situ in Cyprus.’ The intimacy of the rela- 
tions is proved by the following fact : An Alasian having died 
in Egypt, his personal property there was collected and 
transmitted to his family, which had remained at home, by 











Fic. 29.—THE CRETANS’ PRESENTS. 
(W. M. Miller, ZEgyptological Researches, 1.) 


a messenger sent expressly for the purpose. The minister 
(rabisu) of Alasia exchanged gifts and courtesies with the 
‘*rabisu of Egypt, his brother.’’ He warned the latter of 
underhand intrigues which the Great Hittite was conducting 
with the King of Babylon.* The King of Alasia, for his part, 
considered himself Pharaoh’s humble vassal; he asks for holy 
oil for his consecration as king, and also demands metallic 
silver in exchange for the copper which he exports.* 

Crete and the Mycenzan world did not escape the political 
and commercial influence of Egypt. At Tell-el-Amarna itself 
numerous sherds of Cypriote and Cretan pottery have been 
found ; on the other hand, the wares exhumed in Crete often 
exhibit Egyptian decorative motives. In several XVIIIth 
Dynasty tombs we behold processions of the ‘* Keftiu, the 


1 Dussaud, XVIII, 249; cf. Fig. 27 here. 
2 XVII, 3385; XIX, 269. 8 XVIII, 248. 


294 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


great ones of the isles which are in the midst of the Very 
Green (Mediterranean),”’ carrying curiously decorated vases, 
wearing their hair in curls and thin plaits, girt with finely 
embroidered loincloths, and shod with top-boots ; in a word, 
dressed just like the people known to us from the frescoes of 
Knossos. In the tomb of Thothmes IV a fragment of an 
aragonite vase has been found bearing the note written on it 
in ink, ‘* Vase of Kefti.’’! At Ialysus in the island of Rhodes, 
and at Mycene itself, scarabs in the names of Amenophis III 
and Tii bear witness to intercourse with Egypt. At present 





(x at 






























SE ee ee 
EE SE a RN oo 


Fic. 30.—PHGNICIAN SHIPS ON THE NILE aT THEBES (XXTH Dynasty). 


there exist about a hundred small archeological documents 
which have survived as witnesses to the relations between 
Egypt and Greece in the fifteenth and fourteenth centuries.2 
We have seen above that vessels from Crete and Byblos were 
requisitioned by the Egyptian armies to assist the royal fleet 
in the transportation of troops and captured material. They 
ploughed the Augean in every direction and sailed up the 
Nile as far as Thebes, where we see them depicted berthed at 
the quay and unloading merchandise,’ specimens of which 
have been found as far away as Nubia. 

' XVIII, 282 #f.; Hall, XIX, 291 #.; and XIII, vol. I, 110 7. 

* Hall, in XIII, VII (1921), 39 #. 

* Daressy, Revue archéologigue, xxvii. The tomb is attributable to the 


reign of Rameses III, but there is no doubt that similar scenes were witnessed 
upon the Nile in the time of the Amenophis. 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 


bo 
eo) 
or 


IV 


Tue INTERNATIONALIST Poticy oF AMENOPHIS IV 
(AKHENATEN) 


In the days of Amenophis III, therefore, the interpene- 
tration of the various Oriental civilizations was an accom- 
plished fact : Babylonians, Mitannians, Hittites, and A‘geans 
were in communication with Egypt. Intercourse was no 
longer precarious nor restricted to private individuals, as in 
the past. After the great clash of arms which had been 
preceded by the relations of merchants, the kings and their 
families, their administrators, and their agents became per- 
sonally acquainted, allied themselves by ties of friendship 
and marriage, concluded commercial treaties, worked out 
joint plans of military and commercial expansion, and inter- 
changed ideas, projects, and opinions in matters of art and 
in all other domains. A great current of trade and thought, 
of artistic and economic exchanges, was then circulating 
between all the capitals—Babylon, Nineveh, Boghaz-Keul, 
Knossos—and converging like a river with many branches 
upon the Nile Delta, there to be absorbed in Egyptian civil- 
ization. For the first time, to our knowledge, in the world’s 
history men awoke to consciousness of the advantages of 
universal peace and felt the benefits of a common policy. 
With one accord, volentes nolentes, they entrusted its guid- 
ance to Egypt, whose military, political, and economic 
superiority they recognized. Diplomatic documents intro- 
duced formule which reflect the amity of peoples and 
princes—‘‘ to be animated only with a single thought,’’* °° to 
have henceforth but one heart ’’?—terms which characterize 
to perfection the progress of spiritual evolution in the direc- 
tion of a sort of internationalism. Just as there was to be in 
modern times a ‘* concert of Europe,”’ so in the year 1500 
before Christ the ‘‘ concert of the East ’’ was an historical 
fact. 

This political union could not be complete without a 
common spiritual and religious ideal. At a time when the 
gods presided over all the acts of public life, the peace of the 


1 Inscription of Karnak; Egypt and Mitanni. 
2 Pap. Anastasi, ii, Pl. 11; Egyptians and Hittites (under Rameses II). 


296 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


Orient meant that the several peoples’ gods! had laid aside 
their arms and concluded reciprocal treaties. In point of 
fact, Amon and the Osirian triad were worshipped in Syria 7 
Sutekhu, who to the Egyptians personified the Syrian Baal 
or the Hittite-Mitannian Teshub, received a cult on the banks 
of the Nile, together with other Asiatic divinities, such as 
Ishtar, Asiti, Kadesh, and Rashuf ;*> such complete toler- 
ance ruled that during the century of the peace of Egypt no 
religious conflict has been reported among peoples so different 
in race, language, and beliefs (cf. Fig. 40). 





Fic. 31.--WincEep Discs. 
1: Egyptian. 2. Hittite, 3. Assyrian. 


Order in diversity still did not satisfy the Pharaohs. 
They understood what a potent factor in establishing political 
unity it would be if they could set up one cult, common to all 
peoples, of a deity of empire which should be superimposed 
upon the other diverse cults. In Greater Egypt had they not 
set up their own statues as objects of worship in Nubia, 
Sinai, and the Syrian provinces? At Tunep, close to the 
Euphrates, did not the citizens write that ‘‘ they paid fervent 
adoration to the gods and the image of the King of Egypt ”’ ?4 
That divine character which the Egyptians ascribed to 
Pharaoh was admitted without question by the Negroes, the 
Beduins, and the Syrians. What particularly attracted the 
attention of foreigners was the solar origin of the King of 
Egypt, ‘* the son of Ra,’’ whose official titles, costume, and 


* See pp. 328 and 330 below, ? Maspero, XX, vol. II, 570 ff. 
* AX, Il, 157 #. * XXVII, 70, 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 297 


the splendour wherein he lived at Court were constant re- 
minders of his origin in the luminary. The Syrians, when 
they wrote to Pharaoh, called him ‘‘ our Sun ”’; foreign kings, 
striving to imitate him, had themselves also called ‘* Sun ”’ 
by their subjects and took that title in their ceremonial 
inscriptions. An emblem characteristic of the Egyptian 
monuments—the solar disc with two wings—was eagerly 
adopted by the Hittite, Assyrian, and Babylonian kings and 
adorned their monuments and seals (Fig. 31). In this cult 
‘of the Sun, worshipped both in his celestial form as the 
luminous disc, and in his human manifestation—the 
sovereign—the Asiatics recognized one of the chief Semitic 
gods, Shamash, and the Egyptians the great god of the sky, 
Ra. Hence at the Egyptian Court support was given to the 
idea of raising to the dignity of god of empire the Sun-god, 
so that the master of heaven and the master of men might 
be confused in one worship. 

It is since the reign of Amenophis III, the great Emperor 
of the united Orient, that we observe the growth in Egypt of 
the worship of one of the Sun’s forms—Aten, the solar disc, 
whose name recalled Adonai, the ‘*‘ Lord’’ of the Semites. 
As we shall see in greater detail in The Nile and Egyptian 
Civilization, Aten was promoted by Amenophis IV to the 
rank of chief god, if not sole god, in the Egyptian pantheon. 
The fierce resistance offered by the priests of Amon-Ra at 
Thebes did not prevent the religious reformation: the king 
broke down all opposition, drove Amon from his temples, 
and the priests from their offices, and, to mark the final 
character of these unprecedented events, changed his name 
and his capital. Henceforth he called himself Akhenaten 
(Khunaten)—‘‘ he-who-pleases-Aten ’’—and his capital (on 
the site of the present Tell-el-Amarna) was Akhetaten, ‘‘ the 
horizon of Aten.’? The images of Amon and his triad and 
their very names were obliterated from bas-reliefs and in- 
scriptions ; in their places on public monuments the image of 
Aten stood forth, represented by a disc, the rays of which 
drooped down to earth like arms terminating in hands 
(Fig. 32), to embrace his creatures and hold out to them 
the sign of life.’ 

The significance of this reform would escape us had we 


1 See below, pp. 312 f. 2 XXVIII, 56 7. 


298 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


not had the good fortune to discover in the tombs of Amarna 
some extracts from the ‘‘ doctrine’? which Akhenaten taught 
in honour of his new deity. These are hymns which the king 
himself sang to extol the beauties, the benefits, and the 
profound wisdom of Aten. 

The king’s intentions seem to have been these—to offer 
to the Egyptians’ adoration a deity who was no longer 
merely local, peculiar to one town, nor exclusively national 
in character, but who incarnated the essential force of Nature 
and thus might exact universal worship. To this end the 
king chose the sun, one of the primitive elemental deities 
of mankind, whose power, beneficent to some, terrible to 
others, seems nowhere more absolute than in the lands of 
the East. This god was no longer presented to men in the 
form of a faleon; he is depicted as a radiant dise, a picto- 
graphic sign, a hieroglyph, which all men, Egyptians or 
strangers (even we moderns), could read and understand at 
a glance. Aten, who personifies movement and warmth, is 
the beneficent, life-giving father of all that exists—earth, 
water, plants, animals, men of Egypt and foreign countries. 
That was the essential point which the hymns sung by 
Akhenaten emphasize :} 


‘*“ Thou risest beautifully on heaven’s horizon, O Aten, initiator of 
life ! 

‘* When thy orb shineth in the east, thou fillest the earth with thy beauties. 

** Thou art delightful, sublime, radiant high above the earth. Thy rays 
envelope the lands and all that thou hast created. Since thou art Ra (creator), 
thou winnest what they give and thou bindest with bonds of thy love... . 

*“How numerous are thy works! Thou hast created the earth in thy 
heart (what time thou wast alone), the earth with men and beasts great and 
small, all that existeth on earth and walketh on its feet, all which liveth in the 
air and flieth upon wings, the foreign countries (Khast) of Syria (Kharu), 
(and) of Nubia (Kush), (and) the land of Egypt (Qemz). 

“Thou settest each man in his place, creating what is needful for him, 
all with their inheritance and their Property, their languages, differing in 
words, their forms different too, their skins (different in colour). For, O 
Divider, thou hast divided the foreign peoples. 

“* How excellent are thy designs! There is a Nile in the heavens for the 
foreign peoples and all their beasts that go upon feet, and the Nile cometh 
from the lower world for the land of Egypt.? 








* Breasted has made a special study of these texts, see his translation in 
XVI, 371. For the text cf. N. de G. Davies, The Rock Lombs of El-Amarna, 
vol TIT, Pl XXVIz. 

* For the foreign peoples the water falls from heaven; for the Egyptians 
it comes up out of the earth. 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 299 


‘* Thou hast created all forms, thou alone, the nomes, the cities, the fields, 
the ways, the waters. Every eye beholdeth thee above; for thou art the disc 
of the day above the earth. .. .” 


And so Akhenaten’s god drew no distinction between 
strangers and Egyptians; all men are in the same degree his 
sons and must regard themselves as brothers. In the hymn 
it is very remarkable that foreigners—Nubians and Syrians— 
should be named before the Egyptians. For the first time in 
the world a king appeals to strangers, in addition to his own 
people, to worship the universal benefactor. For the first 





Fic. 82.—AKHENATEN ADORING ATEN. 


time religion is conceived as a bond which unites men differ- 
ing in race, language, and colour. Let us compare Akhen- 
aten’s hymn with that of Pepi I quoted on p. 185. What 
progress in the comprehension of human brotherhood! Once 
Pharaoh jealously regarded Egypt as the one marvel of the 
world; now his horizon is enlarged to embrace the bounds of 
the civilized universe. All men therein are sons of the sun 
and consequently sons and subjects of Pharaoh. 

Who can fail to see the close correlation of these 
humanitarian ideas with the imperial policy of Egypt in the 


1 A. Moret, XXVIII, 62 7. 


3800 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


fifteenth century? What was the object of Akhenaten’s 
reform? To offer the solar monotheism to the intelligence 
of the upper classes and the instinctive reverence of the 
people. Now, in religious policy monotheism means im- 
perialism.' If the Aten cult had been adopted, as in Egypt, 
by the Near East as a whole, that would have been a triumph 
for Egyptian imperialism. Such must have been Akhenaten’s 
ambition. At the same time as he established his capital in 
Egypt at Akhetaten he founded south of Soleb in Nubia the 
city of Gem-Aten—* that-which-finds-Aten ” **-_and in Pales- 
tine, perhaps in the neighbourhood of J erusalem, Khinateni,® 
another Akhetaten. These cities, sacred to the new god, 
erected in foreign lands, could-have no other meaning than 
that of cities of empire. But so far we have no information 
as to the welcome which the Syrians and Nubians gave to this 
propaganda in favour of Aten. The imperialistic intentions 
of the *‘ doctrine’? are unveiled in the final phrase of the 
hymns. After exalting the god of the whole of mankind, the 
king concludes : 

“Thou art in my heart; there ewists none other who 
comprehendeth thee save I, thy Soman, iO thous) we who, 
when thou risest, makest all men to live, who, when thou 
settest, makest them to die, raise them up for thy son who 
is sprung from thy flesh, Akhenaten.” 

So only the King of Kgypt is left as the qualified mediator 
between Aten and humanity. He alone understands the 
teaching of Aten, and through him alone the divine benefits 
will be extended to the men of Nubia, Syria, and Egypt. 
Mystic and altruistic enthusiasm are here mingled with 
political astuteness and national egoism. There is one god 
for all men, but this universal god is, above all, Egyptian in 
function; he has but one inspired interpreter, Pharaoh, who 
will be confused with Aten in the adoration of the empire’s 
peoples. 

In creating a religious monopoly in favour of the solar 
disc, Akhenaten had understood that the peoples of the 
empire needed a common ideal above political and com- 
mercial interests. It seems, indeed, that he had attempted 
to press to such extremes the grandiose conception of a world 


+ Breasted, The Earliest ‘nternationalism (1918). 
* Breasted, XII, vol. XL, 116. * Winckler, Letters, 196, 


THE CONCERT OF NATIONS 301 


empire. In this he was distinguished from a Sargon or a 
Hammurabi, who did not attain the same degree of compre- 
hension of the great problems of international policy. If 
the empire of the East were ever near realization before 
Alexander and the Cesars, it was in the time of Amenophis 
IIIf and Akhenaten. 


CHAPTER III 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE AND THE PEOPLES 
OF THE NORTH AND OF THE SEA 


I 
THe Hyirrrres 1n MIranNnrI AND EGYPTIAN SYRIA 


Tue Egyptian Empire, at its zenith about 1400 B.C., no 
longer existed in 1860 at the end of Akhenaten’s reign. How 
did this sudden collapse come about? It was due to a radical 
change, which dissolved at once the internal foundation and 
the external support of that political edifice. 

At home—that is to say, in Egypt—the religious revolu- 
tion with internationalist tendencies, directed by Akhenaten 
against Amon and his priesthood, encountered very fierce 
opposition on the part of the sacerdotal class, supported by 
popular feeling, which had remained traditionalist. In our 
book The Nile and Egyptian Civilization we shall describe 
the miserable end of the Aten cult, the ruin of the new 
capital, Akhetaten, and the restoration of the worships of 
Amon at Thebes under the last kings of the XVIIIth 
Dynasty, Tutankhamen, Ai, and Horemheb (1862-1321 B.c.). 
This reaction was nationalist as much as religious. Akhen- 
aten and his partisans were regarded as traitors and 
foreigners ; in a document of the XIXth Dynasty the memory 
of the internationalist king was stigmatized with the epithet 
**the conquered one (kheru) of Akhutaten,’*! just as if he 
had been a Hyksés or a Hittite. Egypt, we need hardly 
say, was convulsed and greatly weakened by this half 
century of violence. Tutankhamen confesses that on his 
accession (about 1860 B.c.) ‘* the land was in an abominable 
state and like to the world in the time of the primordial 
chaos.” And so when troops were despatched ‘‘ to Zahi to 
enlarge the frontiers of Egypt, they never had any success.’”? 
The internal troubles, therefore, had as their immediate con- 
sequence the ruin of the Pharaohs’ military power in Syria. 

* Loret-Moret, Znscription de Més in XII, XXXIX, 12 and 24. 


* Stele published by Legrain, IV, XXIX, 164. 
302 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE — 303 


Abroad about the same epoch Egypt’s ally Mitanni dis- 
appeared from the political stage ; it was absorbed by a State 
already long established in the Halys basin and in Cilicia— 
that of the Great Hittite,’ whose capital was at Boghaz-Keui. 
There recent excavations have brought to light diplomatic 
archives comparable to those of Tell-el-Amarna, but more 
rich; nearly 20,000 documents written in Babylonian cunei- 
form (and to a lesser extent in Hittite hieroglyphics) reveal 
the political history of the fourteenth and thirteenth centuries 
before our era.” It is significant that these treasures have 
been discovered among a people new to Oriental history. 
Henceforth for nearly a century (roughly from 1360 to 1260 
B.C.) it is the kingdom of the Hittites and not the Court of 
Egypt that becomes the political centre of the Eastern world, 
the point where plots are woven and broken, and where 
forces clash and come to equilibrium under the inspiration 
and guidance of vigorous and resolute statesmen. We refer 
the reader to M. Delaporte’s book for a more detailed account 
of the Hittites’ history, and we note here only their relations 
with their mighty competitors in the Oriental world. 

The Hittite dynasty emerges from the obscure back- 
ground of history about 1420 B.c. with Khattusil I (the Great 
Hittite), father of Shubbiluliuma,’® founder of Boghaz-Keui, 
the ‘* royal town of Khatti,’’ who began to reign about 1870 
B.c., at the end of the reign of Amenophis III. The Hittite 
king had united several tribes or kingdoms into a solid State. 
He was beginning to experience the pressure of Indo-Euro- 
pean tribes coming from the north, but was strong enough 
to divert the stream and direct it southwards. He was him- 
self preparing to descend from Cappadocia through the 
**Cilician Gates,’? across the Taurus, and along the 
Kuphrates to the Plain of Naharina, where he would seize 
the keystone of the arch of the Fertile Crescent. For the 
execution of his designs he possessed numerous soldiers, 
archers, pikemen, and chariot fighters, well armed with 

* This is the expression used by the Egyptians, as we say ‘‘ the grand 
Turk” or ‘‘the Great Mogul.’? The word ‘‘ Hittite” appears as khatt? in 
Babylonian and Ata in Egyptian. 

* Cf. Meissner, Zettschrift der deutschen Morgenland Gesellschaft (1918), 
pp. 82-64; ‘‘ Die Beziehungen Ai gyptens zum Hattireiche nach hattischen 


Quellen.” 
® Called Sapallulu by the Egyptians. 


304 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


APPROXIMATE SYNCHRONISMS OF THE REIGNS BETWEEN 
1450 AND 1850 B.C. 
































B,C. | EGYPT MITANNI | BABYLONIA ASSYRIA | KHATTI 
5 Ee Nas BEE a 
1450 | Thothmes III, 
1501-1447 | 
Amenophis IT, 
ee Pee 
1440 
1430 | 
ie | 
1420 | Thothmes IV, Kara- Ashur- | 
Des 1455 Indash I Uballit IT, | 
1418-1370 | 
Amenophis | 
III, 1415-13880 
1410 
Kadash- ; 
man-Enlil Khattusil 
1400 | 
1390 Dushratta Burna- | 
buriash 
1380 | Amenophis IV 
(Akhenaten), 
1380-1362 ‘ 
Shubbilu- 
liuma 
1370 
1360 | Tutankhamen, |} Mattiuzza 
1362-1350 Kurigalzu Aranda 
! III Muril 
1350 | Ai, 1850-1845 


weak nobel, Sth he chill Mey ah gr 


bronze lances and swords and equipped with shields, rect- 
angular or drawn in at the sides in the shape of a fiddle 
(‘* Pontic ”’ type), with all the endurance and strength of 
a race of mountaineers. In Mitanni, Shubbiluliuma en- 
countered King Dushratta, who had taken precautions 
against the storm and relied on his alliance with Egypt. 
At first Dushratta repulsed the Hittites; he even sent his 
brother-in-law, Amenophis III, a chariot and horses as part 
of the spoils. But his adversary went to work by means of 
indirect attacks. He plotted with the Mitannian king’s own 
brothers, who had sought refuge at the Hittite Court, and 
with the Amorite chiefs of Lebanon. The latter, moun- 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE 305 


taineers intolerant of all subjection, eagerly seized the oppor- 
tunity of ridding themselves of Pharaoh’s protectorate. 
Thereafter the concerted intrigues of the Great Hittite, 
Dushratta’s brothers, and the Amorite princes came to sap 
the authority of the Kings of Mitanni and Egypt and to 
compass their simultaneous ruin. 

The Amarna letters contain a long report dealing with 
the conflict of a certain Amorite chief, Abdashirta, and his 
son Aziru, with Ribadda, the khazanu of Byblos, who had 
remained loyal to Egypt towards the close of the reign of 
Amenophis III. Abdashirta took Simyra by surprise, and, 
despite the despatch of Egyptian troops, let Mitanni be 
occupied by the Hittite king, who deposed Dushratta and 
deported the population to Cappadocia. But Shubbiluliuma 
did not want a conflict with Egypt; after the death of 
Amenophis III he wrote to his son Amenophis IV to con- 
gratulate him on his accession, and pretended to respect the 
Pharaohs’ hegemony. Amenophis IV, whether through in- 
difference or impotence, was not wise enough or not strong 
enough to act effectively. He allowed Dushratta to be 
crushed by the Hittites, and Byblos to be attacked by Aziru, 
with whom the chiefs of Arvad and Sidon were allied. He 
did not bestir himself when the revolt spread to Palestine, 
and Abimelek, Pharaoh’s Governor in Jerusalem, wrote 
to tell him: ** All the king’s land is rushing headlong to 
destruction.”’ 

Nay, further; when the Egyptian governor of North 
Syria, Yankhamon, sent some troops to restore order, the 
Kgyptian Foreign Office, misled by treacherous reports, 
allowed Aziru (who had had Ribadda assassinated) to come 
and make his excuses before Pharaoh. The conclusion of 
this imbroglio was as follows: Aziru, having made a formal 
submission to Akhenaten, returned from Egypt with the 
powers of a provincial governor. He had been able to keep 
his independence over against the Pharaoh, but, according 
to the Boghaz-Keui archives, he no longer retained it in 
respect of the Hittite king. The latter treated Aziru as a 
vassal and constrained him to make a treaty of alliance and 
submission. As for Mitanni, its King Dushratta was at 
length assassinated by one of his brothers. Shubbiluliuma 


* Moret, XXVII, 65; Niebuhr, ‘‘ Die Amarna-Zeit” (Alte Orient, 1903). 
20 


OF THE EAST 


FIRST EMPIRES 


306 





“SLOA(ANS SIH AM IdADY AO ALV) AHL LV ACAWOOTAM SI ‘SAAILAVD) ALINOWY AG GAaIOINd ‘J ILaAS— col 
x | 


Se ee 


L} Bs = ry ON 


a, ° = ete 
hitiy,. - i ae 
G BY, fn He, 

x Ge 3 





SANZ, 
ANRC 


Via 


ROONEY 
CRASS) 


nn 


Ci Lr Iii ie 
ALE 


[Xe 





Bess 
a iy LN Ms 
i 





a 
3 
Ss 








GCE 
mii! 
f 


= ~E 








et 
EG 


\f 


: rauNe Gy PRS . 
Ss SMES Sy | 





THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE 807 


set Mattiuzza on the throne of Mitanni, compelled him to 
marry his daughter, and so made a vassal of his son-in- 
law. Thereafter the Mitannian dynasty was extinguished; 
Naharina, together with Carchemish and Aleppo, was occu- 
pied by the Hittites, who advanced south as far as Kadesh. 

At the end of Akhenaten’s reign Egypt, exhausted by 
her religious quarrels, could not reply. Syria (Upper Lotanu) 
was in the hands of Hittites; Palestine (Lower Lotanu) was 
abandoned to the Amorites and the Khabiri, nomads, prob- 
ably the ancestors of the Hebrews, who were not to attain 
the social life of a State till three centuries later. 

This actual situation is confirmed by the documents un- 
earthed at Boghaz-Keui. There can be read a curious letter 
from a Queen of Egypt, Dakhamon . . . Tutankhamen’s 
childless widow. She asks the Great Hittite to send her one 
of his sons—he had many—to become her husband. Thus 
the widow of Akhenaten’s son-in-law and successor hoped to 
consolidate her position in Egypt, and probably to preserve 
the throne, if only she could obtain a Hittite prince as 
consort and support. The reversal of the situation is 
typical. The Hittite power was, moreover, recognized in a 
formal pact; the treaty concluded by Rameses II recalls that 
there had been a regular treaty between Shubbiluliuma and 
a king of Egypt whose name is not given, but who can only 
be one of the immediate successors of Akhenaten (see p. 326 
below). What was the frontier between the two countries? 
We do not know, but Kadesh being in the hands of the 
Hittites, it can only be concluded that Syria was no longer 
an Egyptian province. 


II 


Seti I AND Ramesss II in Conruict witH 
THE HITTITES 


The advance of the Hittite realm became a danger to 
Egypt all the more menacing as counterbalancing forces were. 
lacking in Asia. Babylon in the hands of the Kassites re- 
mained inert; Assyria was still far from formidable; the 
Atgean peoples, whose strength was mainly on the sea, 


1 Letter quoted by King in XIII, IV (1917), p. 193. 


3808 =FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


threatened the coasts of Egypt more than the continental 
frontiers of the Hittites. 

When, therefore, Horemheb (1345-1321 B.c.) had re- 
established the royal authority in Egypt and founded the 
XIXth Dynasty, he certainly took in the gravity of the 
situation, but the restoration of order in Egypt absorbed 
almost his whole attention. We do not know whether he 
tried to do anything in the direction of Asia, although the 





Fic. 84.—TuHe ‘‘ PRINCES OF LEBANON ’’ FELL PINES FOR Seti I. 


pictorial monuments represent him receiving tribute from 
the Hittites and some Hau-nebu.! 

The work of Thothmes III had to be begun all over again, 
for the Shasu (Beduins) and the Khabiri were now disputing 
the possession of Palestine and had reduced to nil Pharaoh’s 
authority in this province that the Hittites had spared. With 
Seti I (1319-1300 B.c.) begins a very strenuous military effort 
to re-establish the Egyptian Empire in Asia. We can trace 
its progress, thanks to a long series of very excellent pictures 
engraved by the XIXth Dynasty Pharaohs on the walls of 
the temples in Upper Egypt, especially at Abydos, Luxor, 
Karnak, and Abu-Simbel. 


1 XVII, III, § 34. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE _ 309 


In the eighth year of his reign (1319) Seti I attacked the 
Shasu. He dispersed the bellicose tribes, captured the little 
fortresses in Canaan, crossed Carmel, and on the farther side 
of the Jordan set up a frontier stele in the massive of 
Hauran.' Retracing his steps, Seti occupied the ports and 
reorganized the ‘‘ naval bases’’ which should allow him to 
carry his military operations into Upper Lotanu. Then Seti I 
returned overland to his frontier town of Zalu (Fig. 33), 
driving before him “‘ the princes of the land of the Shasu and 
the Kharu,”’ chained by the neck, some of whom were sacri- 
ficed upon the altar of Amon.” The Egyptians had become 
masters of Lebanon once more, and the mountain princes 





Fic. 85.—HITTITE AND SYRIAN PRISONERS OF SET! I. 


had to begin again to have the fine pines felled to be des- 
patched as tribute to Pharaoh (Fig. 34). 

As in the time of Thothmes III, the Egyptians set out 
from the reconquered naval bases for the attack upon Upper 
Lotanu. In one expedition, the exact date of which is 
missing, Seti I occupied Kadesh* and the land of Amurru. 
For the first time the Egyptians came to grips with the 
Hittites; a battle was fought which resulted in an Egyptian 
success. Unfortunately we have no interesting details about 
the initial contest between the two great military powers of 
the day. The reliefs of Karnak only enumerate the princes 
of Lotanu and the Hittite chiefs (Fig. 35) among the captives 


1 XVII, III, § 81; XIX, 356. 2 XVII, III, §§ 95-119. 
*° M, Pézard discovered a stele of Seti I on the site of Kadesh in 1922. 


310 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


who defiled before Amon.' It is not improbable that a 
treaty was concluded between Seti I and the Hittite King 
Mutallu. In any case, the Hittite penetration was arrested 
south of the Orontes, and the Egyptian protectorate was 
re-established in Palestine and on the coasts of Pheenicia. 


The accession of Rameses II in 1800 B.c. brought to the 
throne of Egypt a young, ambitious, and warlike king whose 
long reign (1300-1234) was marked by events of decisive 
import. To be near these provinces of Lotanu, which he 
hoped to restore to their former prosperity, Rameses founded 
a city bearing his name, Pi-Rameses, on the site of Pelusium 
and Avaris; he made it the political capital of the Delta and 
the seat of the administration for the provinces of Palestine 
and Syria.’ 

In the second year of his reign we find Rameses II on the 
coast between Tyre and Byblos, carving triumphal stele on 
the precipices of the gorge of the Nahr-el-Kelb, a small 
coastal stream that leads across Lebanon to the upper valley 
of the Jordan. It is a way of access to Ccele Syria less 
practicable than the Nahr-el-Kebir (Eleutheros), the direct 
route from the port of Simyra to Kadesh. Undoubtedly the 
use of the Nahr-el-Kelb means that the Nahr-el-Kebir was in 
the hands of the Hittites.* 

Mursil or his son Mutallu (for the Hittite chronology is 
here uncertain) prepared for a decisive struggle for the 
supremacy in Syria. The situation had been aggravated on 
the frontiers of the Hittite realm. Since the Achzan invasion 
towards the end of the fifteenth century had substituted for 
the Cretans’ civilization and hegemony, the preponderance 
of the Mycenzans, the maritime and warlike tribes of the 
western coasts of Asia Minor, Phrygians, Mysians, Lydians, 
Carians, and Lycians, yielded to the impulse emanating from 
the opposite side of the Hellespont, abandoned their seats in 
disorder, and gained, either by land routes or by sea, the 
coasts of Cilicia, the islands of the Aigean, and the shores of 


* XVII, III, §§ 147-152. 


* See Gardiner’s exhaustive study, “‘ The Delta Residence of the Rames- 
sides ” in XIII, V (1918), pp. 127 ff. 
* Lepsius, Denkmailer, III, 197, a-c; cf. XVII, III, § 279. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE 9 311 


Phoenicia and Palestine. Even in the days of Akhenaten 
the Amarna letters had already mentioned the presence of 
Danauana (Daneans)' and Shakalasha, or Sheklal,’ at 
Simyra, of Shardana, or Shardanes,* at Byblos, and of 
Lycians (Lukki) on the roads and coast of Syria.* Like all 
robust and brave barbarians who filter into lands of old 
civilization, they hired out their strength to the highest 
bidders, sometimes taking service under Pharaoh, sometimes 
accepting the pay of the Amorite princes or the Hittites. 
Towards 1800 s.c. the gradual infiltration developed into a 
steady migration, for the archives of Boghaz-Keui and the 
Egyptian texts suddenly reveal a dozen peoples of Asia Minor 
grouped round the Hittite army in Naharina. Then appear 
for the first time in history those names made famous by the 
Homeric poems—Pidasa (Pedasians),° Masa (Mysians), Dar- 
danut (Dardanians), Iliwna (men of Ilion), Kirkisha (men of 
Gerges in the Troad), beside the Lycians and the Danzans.° 
The cohesion of these tribes is striking ; they seem all to come 
from the Troad.’ It really looks as if a relatively homo- 
geneous population had emigrated in a‘compact mass towards 
the Fertile Crescent, under the pressure of the Achzan 
peoples coming from the opposite shores of the Hellespontine 
Straits. 

Wedged in between these people of the Troad and the 
Egyptians, the Hittites found themselves in an awkward 
predicament. But Shubbiluliuma and his sons were experi- 
enced politicians and possessed a fine army. Powerless to 
expel the newcomers, they bound them by contracts and 
utilized them as mercenaries. With the petty kings of 
Naharina and the Lower Orontes, already broken in to 
diplomatic methods, Mutallu concluded treaties, some of 
which have been discovered at Boghaz-Keui. 

The Hittite kings had been able to array against Egypt 
one of those political and military partnerships to which 
modern history gives the name of coalitions. Mutallu writes 


1 Maspero, XX, II, p. 860, n. 1. 

* Probably come from the regions of Sagalassos to the north of Pisidia 
(XX, II, p. 359). 

* From the district of Sardes in Lydia (XX, II, p. 860, n. 2). 

* XX, Il, p. 359, n. 3. 

* From Pedasos in the south of the Troad (/i/ad, VI, 34). 

6 XVII, III, §§ 306, 349. 7 XXXIII, p. 454. 


3812) FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


to the King of Aleppo, Rimisharrima, to remind him that 
his father, Mursil, had already concluded a pact with him, 
but the copy of the pact had been destroyed. So he sends 
him another tablet, sealed with his seal, containing the 
following clauses: 


‘“The Sun,’ the great king, shall be the ally of Rimisharrima, King of 
Aleppo, and Rimisharrima, King of Aleppo, shall be the ally of the Sun, the 
great king, the King of Khatti. The sons of the Sun, Mursil, King of Khatti, 
shall be the allies of Rimisharrima, and he of them. ... And we, sons of 
Shubbiluliuma,? the great king, altogether and with our houses shall act 
as one in these circumstances. The gods of Khatti and the gods of Aleppo 
are witnesses thereof,’’ 


Other treaties of the same sort were no doubt made with 
the kings of Naharina, Carchemish, Kodi (Cilicia), Kadesh, 
and Arvad, who, according to the Egyptian texts,+ were 
allies of the Hittite great king. 

The treaty with the kingdom of Kizwadana, situated to 
the west of Khatti, was still more precise. This realm, which 
seems to have lain between Assyria and Khatti, was the 
object of quite exceptional watchfulness. In the time of 
Khattusil it had belonged to Khatti; subsequently it had 
recovered its independence and had been joined to the 
kingdom of Kharri. Mursil had succeeded in attaching to his 
policy Shumashurra, the King of Kizwadana, and had bound 
him by a treaty of sixty-four articles, which included a clause 
providing for a military alliance. ‘If I, the Sun, commence 
war upon any foreign country, be it Kharri, be it Arsawa, 
then Shumasharra will give 100 equipped’ horses. and 1,000 
foot-soldiers, he shall fight in the army of the Sun. Their 
expenses en route, until they fight in company with the Sun, 
shall be provided for them by the Sun.” 

Such was the truly formidable coalition which Mutallu 
had been able to assemble against Rameses II. The strength 
of the army thus constituted lay in the number and the blind 
courage of these barbarian masses, but a real weakness re- 
sulted from its inexperience in scientific warfare and its lack 
of homogeneity. To it Rameses opposed a smaller but more 

' The Sun, the title taken by the Hittite king. On this see above, p. 296. 
* The King of Aleppo was therefore a son of Shubbiluliuma. 
® Meissner, /.c¢., 35-36. 


XVII, III, § 306. 
That is to say, chariots with their complement of three combatants each. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE © 313 


compact army composed of four corps, the division of Amon 
under the direct command of the king, and the divisions of 
Ra, Phtah, and Sutekhu. To this Egyptian militia were 
joined Sudanese black troops,' “the Young Recruits of 
Amurru,’’? and some Shardana mercenaries.2 The latter, 
only recently incorporated in the Egyptian army, still kept 
their original armament—a long iron sword, a round shield, 





Fic. 86.—THE SHARDANA IN THE SERVICE OF RAMESEs II. 


and a metal casque surmounted by horns and a crescent— 
but they had adopted the twisted loincloth and the leather 
cuirass of the picked troops among the Egyptians. Their tall 
stature, fairness of skin, regularity of feature, and small 
moustaches excited surprise among the people of the Nile, 
and so the sculptors loved to depict them on temple walls 
(Fig. 36). The Pharaohs put into the field against the bar- 
barians other barbarians, a fact which invests the clash of 
the two armies with a special interest. The campaign con- 


* The texts from Boghaz-Keui call them ‘“‘ the troops from Melukha.”? 
* Derived in the first place from prisoners of war, XVII, III, § 307. 


314 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


ducted in the fifth year of Rameses II (1295 s.c.) culminated 
in the Battle of Kadesh, the first of the world’s great battles 
of which we have a detailed account.’ 


The Egyptian army set out from Zalu at the end of 
April, 1295 B.c., and after a month’s march at a pace of at 
least twelve and a half miles a day reached the latitude of 
the forts near Beirout. There ‘‘on the coast of the land 
of Amurru”’’ it established its bases for commissariat and 
depots for men and munitions, and advanced to the valley 
of the Upper Orontes, probably by way of the Nahr-el-Kelb. 
It marched down-stream without opposition and reached 
** the heights to the south of Kadesh.”’ 

Kadesh, on the site of the present Tell Nebi-Mandth,? is a 
fortress perched on the top of a hill on the left bank of the 
Orontes at the confluence of a stream, a little south of the 
present Lake of Homs. The route followed crossed from 
the right to the left bank by a ford at the village of 
Shabtuna, six and a quarter miles above Kadesh. The banks 
are precipitous, towering above the river to a height of 100 
feet, and only leave one narrow passage, through which war- 
chariots could advance but slowly. Seen from Shabtuna, 
Kadesh on its hill forms a screen which masks a wide stretch 
of the horizon. Behind this screen Mutallu with all his forces 
was awaiting Rameses in silence. 

Reaching Shabtuna, Rameses, who knew nothing about 
the enemy’s position, was misled by two sham deserters sent 
expressly for this purpose by Mutallu.? ‘* Two Beduins 
(Shasu) came to say: ‘Our brethren, who belong to the 
greatest of the families among those that are with this 
defeated one of Khatti, would be the slaves of Pharaoh and 
abandon this defeated one of Khatti. Now this defeated one 

* All the aspects of this battle have been studied with great erudition by 
J. Breasted, The Battle of Kadesh, and XVI, III, §§ 298-351. 

* See the photograph of the country as it looks to-day given in the account 
of the archeological exploration carried out by J. H. Breasted in 1920, and 
published in the American Journal of Semitic Languages (July, 1922), p. 272. 

* The account of the battle of Kadesh has been preserved in two series of 
texts: first, a sort of Official Bulletin engraved on the walls of the temples 
beside the bas-reliefs illustrating the battle; second, a poetical account, called 
the Poem of Pentaur from the name of the scribe who has transcribed it 


on to papyrus. The translation will be found in Breasted, XVII, III, 
§§ 305 7. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE = 315 


of Khatti is encamped in the country of Aleppo, north of 
Tunep ; for he fears to come south because of Pharaoh... .’ 
Now, these were lying words that the two Shasu spake, for 
the defeated one of Khatti had sent them to see where 
His Majesty was and to contrive some trick to prevent His 
Majesty’s soldiers from fighting. ... And this conquered 
one of Khatti had come with all his chiefs from every 
country, with infantry and chariots, and was drawn up ready 
for battle behind perfidious Kadesh; but His Majesty knew 
naught thereof. Then His Majesty came down into the plain 
and arrived to the north-west of Kadesh,’’' where Rameses 
pitched his camp. 

This, then, was the situation: Rameses, believing the 
hostile army 100 miles farther north, crossed the ford of 
Shabtuna to take up his position beyond Kadesh, so as to 
cut off the town from any communication with the relieving 
army and to begin the siege in perfect security. For the 
occupation of this advance post he had taken with him only 
his bodyguard (the Shardana), and the division of Amon, the 
body of the army, delayed by the ford, where the chariots 
proceeded in single file, and also by the narrow way through 
a forest on the left bank between the ford and Kadesh (the 
Forest of Bay), was following in divisions with intervals 
between them. ‘* The division of Ra was (only) crossing the 
stream south of Shabtuna, at a distance of one iter (approxi- 
mately four miles) from the [division of Amon]... the 
division of Phtah was (still) to the south of the city of 
Aranami, and the division of Sutekhu was following on the 
march.’*? 

However, Rameses sent a patrol in the direction of 
Kadesh (which was occupied by a garrison of the enemy). 
It brought back two Hittite scouts. Pharaoh, who was 
resting on his electron throne, cross-examined them himself.° 
‘Who are you?” ‘* We belong,’’ answered the Hittite 
scouts, *‘to the defeated one of Khatti. ’Tis he who has 
sent us to see where His Majesty was.’’ His Majesty replied: 

1 XVII, III, §§ 319-20 (Bulletin). The following quotations indicated by 
paragraphs are based upon XVII, III. 

2 §310 (Poem). 

3’ Not without having them soundly flogged to make them speak the truth, 


an episode represented on the reliefs in the temples, § 330; cf. the drawing 
in XX, II, p. 392. 


316 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


** Then where is he, the defeated one of Khatti? I had heard 
that he was in the country of Aleppo.’’ They replied: Lo, 
the defeated one of Khatti is in readiness with the numerous 
mountaineers (Khastiu) whom he has brought with him to 
conquer, with all the countries of all the districts of the land 
of Khatti, of the land of Naharina, and of Kodi in their 
totality. They are provided with infantry and chariots, all 
well armed, and as numerous as the sand grains on the 
beach ; they are waiting, ready for battle, behind Kadesh the 
perfidious. . . .” 

This report filled the king’s tent with consternation ; the 
council of chiefs was called together to hear the confessions 
of the Hittites. Rameses interrogated his officers. ‘* Look 
you, how the chiefs (both Egyptian and Asiatic) have acted ! 
They have told Pharaoh that this defeated one of Khatti was 
in the land of Aleppo and that he had fled before His 
Majesty on learning of his approach! And this is what I 
hear at this hour from these scouts, that this defeated one of 
Khatti has come with men and horses as numerous as the 
sands, and that he is drawn up behind Kadesh the per- 
fidious. And the officers of this country, like those of the 
land of Pharaoh, knew naught of it!’? Then the officers 
began to make excuses, laying the blame upon subordinates. 
‘* Orders were given to the vizir to hasten (the arrival) of His 
Majesty’s soldiers, who were stil] on the march south of 
Shabtuna, to bring them thither where His Majesty was.??! 
On the temple reliefs we see a horseman starting off at a 
gallop in search of the divisions that had remained behind. 

While Rameses was holding a council meeting, Mutallu 
was acting. He had manceuvred his left wing round Kadesh 
to keep out of sight of his foes, and on the right bank of the 
Orontes he was massing his chariots for the attack. ** He 
ordered his men into their chariots, a multitude more 
numerous than the sands, to the number of three men to 
each chariot, one of the three being a Hittite.’> Mutallu 
knew how to wait for the most favourable moment; that 
came when he saw the division of Ra debouching from the 
Forest of Bay. “Then he sent them across the river south 

' Bulletin, §§ 321-324. 


* Champollion, Monuments de lEgypte, I, Pl. 18, p. 68. 
% Poem, § 370. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE | 317 


of Kadesh, and they made their way among His Majesty’s 
soldiers, who were on the march and who understood nothing 
(of what was happening). Then His Majesty’s infantry and 
chariots gave way before them and fled northward right to 
the spot where His Majesty was.’ 


eo ae 


pie Sy 
KADESH Ne 

















CS 
Ai j 
i ox 
Ke : ; - 

en a en % rc 

1 £25 ZZ HITTITE 3 
1 ZH MINS Liz, A & 
Gy Mays BARMY 1 

RCT ae } 
cf 


sme %, ‘ 
Ls Uf \s 
HS ak! fit 
wv 


liz 
{’. 





2500 MiestaG 
~S& Hittite 
Chariots 


Mat ry 
\v 


Nig, 


MMOH Ney 





HAUL RA tte 


IW NHOU s 





Q 

Q 

° 

9 

Coe 
MED 
















a © 0 zdpy| jo == Ses 
° o5=f/0O=—> 
+ 0°90 20 2° o> f[HS >= 

eS © 0e°0 o> cl > 
<0 t A o> oS 
oe? Ke OF = 
ie Ae be oe pape 
ier tee a EL OF = 

Q ° © = — = 

OOS oe AL 7 

. ° ote Pee ROY 

RY A == 


Anttnitnyy,, 






Egyptian army 
on the march 


Map VII.—THE BaTTLe oF KADESH, 
(After Major Burne.) 


We can well imagine the division of Ra dispersed along 
the route in marching order at the end of a weary stretch. 
Surprised upon its right flank by the thunderous, terrifying 
charge of 2,500 chariots in four groups? launched like a whirl- 
wind, it offered no resistance. The poem admits that (the 
Hittites) “* cut in two the division of Ra, which was marching 


1 Bulletin, § 325. 
* Figure given in the Poem and the reliefs, §§ 312-336. 


818 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


all unconscious and quite unable to reform its ranks for 
battle.’’? 

The fugitives from the division of Ra poured pell-mell into 
Rameses’ camp, with the Hittite chariots hard on their heels ; 
the result was frightful confusion. It is a miracle that 
Rameses and his whole advance guard were not captured or 
cut to pieces. Although the texts are silent on the point, it 
may be inferred that the story of the Battle of Megiddo 
150 years before, which is the usual story of Oriental battles, 
repeated itself: the Hittite mounted troops arriving at 
Pharaoh’s camp had no thought but plunder, and let slip 
their prey while grasping the shadow. Rameses had time to 
arm himself for battle. ‘‘ When His Majesty saw that, he 
was filled with rage against them, like his father Mentu of 
Thebes. Taking his panoply of war, the king with his own 
hands seized his coat of mail and was like to Baal in his hour. 
He went himself to fetch his horses and brought them up in 
haste, being all alone. And he went among the ranks of the 
enemy, the men of this defeated one of Khatti. And His 
Majesty was like unto Sutekhu, the great one of valour. He 
began to cut and hack about among them, he drove them 
headlong, falling one over another, right to the waters of the 
Orontes. ‘I have conquered all the lands when I was quite 
alone, when my foot-soldiers and my chariots had abandoned 
me. No one of them returned. I swear, as Ra loves me and 
my father Tum favours me, that all that My Majesty has 
said above, I have done it in very deed in the sight of my 
foot-soldiers and my chariots!’ ’’? (Fig. 37). 

However much exaggeration is to be allowed for in this 
ending of the official bulletin, it is clear from all the docu- 
ments that Rameses kept his head and valiantly exposed his 
person with the decision, the courage, and the strength of a 
boyish hero. But it is no less certain that he would in the 
end have been overwhelmed by the Hittites in their chariots, 
had not the latter been surprised, in their turn, by the timely 
arrival of fresh Egyptian troops. That is clearly shown by 
the reliefs in the temples. At the conclusion of the council 
held in the camp, messengers on horseback and the vizir 
himself in a chariot had rushed to meet the delayed divisions. 
Avoiding being overtaken by the rout of the second division 


4-8 Slik 2 This is the end of the Bulletin, §§ 325-327. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE § 319 


‘HILLVG FHL NI [TI SISHWVY—' LE “OT 


Fed UE ch i 
fe s i y 

My 3 j pies Lee Mi Vir ay aay ee 

J i VERT Ti AG); 





y 


820) FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


(Ra), the messengers and the vizir succeeded in joining the 
third division (Phtah) while it was in the Forest of Bay, and 
shouted: ‘*‘ Forward, Pharaoh your master [is attacked ].’”! 
On the other hand, in the Forest of Bay marched also a corps 
of *‘ Pharaoh’s Young Troops (Naluna) from the land of 
Amurru,”’’ coming, no doubt, from the depots of the coast 
where the army’s bases lay. These troops, in good order and 
composed of young soldiers full of ardour, quickened step, 
and, debouching from the forest, saw the tumultuous combat 
in the camp, where the Hittites were plundering, the Egyp- 
tians flying, while Pharaoh was fighting heroically in a 
corner of the field of battle. The unexpected arrival of the 
**Young Men’ and of the third division transformed the 
Egyptian rout into a Hittite defeat.? Let us leave the texts 
on the bas-reliefs to tell the tale. ‘Arrival of Pharaoh’s 
Naluna from the land of Amurru. They found that the 
soldiers of the defeated one of Khatti had [invaded] His 
Majesty’s camp on the west side when His Majesty was left 
alone with no soldiers with him, since the soldiers of the 
(first) division of Amon, with whom His Majesty was, had 
not finished pitching camp, and the soldiers of the (second) 
division of Ra, with the soldiers of the (third) divisions of 
Phtah, were on the march, their troops having not yet come 
out of the Forest of Bay. Then the Naluna cut in pieces the 
enemy belonging to the vile defeated one of Khatti when the 
latter entered Pharaoh’s camp. And Pharaoh’s officers slew 
them (too) without letting a single one of them escape.’”® 

It is strange that Mutallu did not renew his attack after 
the arrival of the Egyptian reinforcements. The reliefs in 
the temples show us the rest of the Hittite army, all ready 
to intervene, drawn up in “ two divisions of 9,000 soldiers 
and chariots behind the defeated one of Khatti”’ ; some 
soldiers left the ranks to rescue the fugitives from the beaten 
army. But ‘‘ Mutallu stood before his soldiers and _ his 
chariots, his face averted, his heart dismayed. He came not 
forth to fight through fear of His Majesty, since he had seen 


 §§ 333-334. 

* This has been well brought out by Max Burchardt in Reder “ A°gypten 
und Hethiter”’ (Die Alte Orient, 1919). See also the very lively commentary 
on and criticism of the battle by Major Burne, in XIII, VII, pp. 191-195. 

3 § 340. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE 321 


His Majesty victorious over the defeated one of Khatti and 
all the princes of all the countries who were with him.’ 
However, beneath his eyes Rameses and his soldiers, now 
victorious, were throwing the Hittites into the river. There 
perished, cut down or drowned, the chiefs of the mounted 
forces and of the archers, the commander of the Hittite 
guard, the driver of Mutallu’s chariot, even one of his 






SO 





a , 
WIPER MAIS A INL 
NV \) so ip. ,. 
rf S 


CESS NEID : 
UNNI INNA 
4 


Val Aya 
Wh NK AINA XK KA a 


_- 
yo 
> 


Fic. 88.—THE HITTITE RESERVES RESCUING THE FUGITIVES ON THE BANK 
OF THE ORONTES. 


brothers, the scribe of his archives, and other notables. The 
garrison of Kadesh succeeded with great difficulty in drag- 
ging some out of the water. We see the luckless prince of 
Aleppo held aloft head down by his own soldiers, to enable 
him to vomit up the water which he had swallowed? (Fig. 38). 
The final success of the Egyptians was not disputed. Mutallu, 
seeing night coming on and fearing the unexpected arrival 
of the (fourth) division of Sutekhu, was unwilling to embroil 
his reserves and yielded up the field of battle. 

1 § 338. 

* This prince of Aleppo is probably the Rimisharrima of the Hittite 


sources. 
21 


822. FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


Such was the famous battle, which bears no sort of 
resemblance to the frontal attacks and the single combats of 
the earlier epochs. Here the strategy of the chiefs and the 
troops’ capacity for carrying out manceuvres played a no 
less decisive part than the strength and courage of the 
combatants. A point to be noted is that the Hittites rather 
than the Egyptians give proof of foresight, skill, and resolu- 


iu 
y 


I 


i on 
SS 
Re 
> 








pre 


Fic. 89.—THE EGYPTIANS STORMING DAPUR. 


tion. Nevertheless, the discipline of the old troops and the 
spirit of the young king had redeemed the imprudence of the 
Egyptian General Staff, which lacked the sense to spy out 
ahead a hostile land or to cover its line of march. The final 
result is that the battle was indecisive and only a victory for 
Rameses IT in the obviously biassed Egyptian documents. * 


* It looks as if a long despatch, unfortunately much mutilated, from the 
archives of Boghaz-Keui refers to the battle of Kadesh. In it there is a 
question of fact to be settled (as to the alleged Egyptian victory?), great 
armies of the King of Egypt and of Khatti, three corps of troops on the 
march (the three Egyptian divisions which took part in the action?), the 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE 323 


The poem copied by the scribe Pentaur! magnifies all the 
episodes of the battle and turns them to the glory of 
Rameses. At the moment when Pharaoh finds himself alone 
in his camp, which is given over to Hittite plunderers, he 
turns in spirit to his house’s god and asks him imperiously if 
he, too, has deserted him. 


‘““Who art thou, then, my father Amon? A father forgetful of his 
son? ... I call upon thee, O my father Amon! Behold me here in the 
midst of peoples so numerous that no man knoweth who are the nations 
leagued against me and I am all alone, none other is with me! My numerous 
soldiers have deserted me, none of my chariot-fighters hath regarded me 
when I have called upon them; not one of them hath heard my voice when I 
cried to them. But I found that Amon is worth more to me than a million 
soldiers, than a hundred thousand chariots, than a myriad brothers or young 
sons; for numbers of men count for naught, but Amon prevaileth against 


them.” While the voice was echoed unto Hermonthis,? Amon arose at my 
bidding, he stretched out his hand towards me, he uttered a cry of joy when 
he hailed me from behind: ‘‘ Face to face, face to face with thee, Rameses 


Meriamon, I am with thee! ’Tis I, thy father! my hand is with thee and I 
am worth more to thee than hundreds of thousands. I, the strong one who 
love valliance, I have recognized a courageous heart, and my heart is 
satisfied.” Then (continues Rameses), ‘‘ I am like to Mentu. To the right 
I hurl my spear, to the left I seize the enemies. I am as Baal in his hour 
before them. I have encountered two thousand five hundred chariots, and 
as soon as I am in the midst of them they are overthrown before my steeds. 
Not one of those men hath found courage for combat, their hearts fail them 
in their breast, fear paralyzeth their limbs. They know not how to launch 
their darts and have no longer any strength to hold their lances. I hurl 
them into the waters as the crocodile plungeth therein; they are prostrated 
face downwards one upon the other and I am slaying in the midst of them. 
He who falleth riseth not again. And so they say one to the other: ‘ This 
is not a man who is amongst us, it is Sutekhu the great one of valour, it is 
Baal incarnate.’ ’’® 


The real result of the battle came to this: Kadesh was 
not taken, Rameses returned to Egypt to celebrate his 
**triumph ”’ and sacrifice some prisoners before Amon. In 
the following years Syria and Palestine as a whole rose 
against Egypt. 

Rameses II had to reconquer the western horn of the 





king sitting on his throne (like Rameses II in his camp), the black troops 
of Egypt, the army of Amurru (the Young Men?), the King of Aleppo, etc. ; 
cf. Meissner, /.c., pp. 37-42. 

1 Discovered by Champollion on a papyrus from Aix-en-Provence. See 
the bibliography given by Maspero, XX, II, 396. 

2 Former sanctuary of Mentu, south-west of Thebes. 

3 Maspero’s translation. 


824 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


Fertile Crescent step by step. We find a siege of Ascalon 
and the storming of Dapur in the land of Amurru depicted 
in great detail on a bas-relief in the Ramasseum (Fig. 39), 
and a campaign in Naharina in the vicinity of Tunep, a city 
where the statue of the king of Egypt had been a traditional 
object of adoration since the days of Thothmes III.! It took 
sixteen years, from 1295 to 1279 B.c. to bring these cam- 
paigns to an unstable conclusion. 

However, Mutallu had died; his brother, Khattusil II 
(1290-1255?), had replaced him upon the throne. Other 
perils were looming in the east and resulted in a change in 
the orientation of Hittite policy. 


Ill 
Tue Ecypto-Hirtirt ENTENTE 


The rivalry between the Hittites and the Egyptians in 
the west of the Fertile Crescent was only one episode in the 
history of the Oriental world in the thirteenth century B.c. ; 
another rivalry was beginning to manifest itself in the east, 
in Mesopotamia—that between Assyria and Babylonia. For 
a detailed account of these events I refer the reader to 
M. Delaporte’s book in the History of Civilization. I will 
merely remark that, after centuries of waiting and restrained 
ambition, the kings of Assyria at the beginning of the thir- 
teenth century possessed the forces necessary for an aggres- 
sive policy. Not only did they free themselves from the 
suzerainty, long fictitious, of Babylon, but Shalmaneser I 
(1290-1260 B.c.) conquered Diarbekir on the Upper Tigris, 
crossed the Euphrates, and captured Carchemish, at least 
for the time. Thus the Hittite realm was attacked on the 
flank by a vigorous adversary with fresh and already formid- 
able resources. The contest for hegemony in Syria came 
thereafter to take a second place in the concerns of Khattusil ; 
it was the Assyrian peril which seemed the most menacing. 

Hittite diplomacy immediately set to work. Against 
Assyria the natural ally was Babylon, the former suzerain 
of Assur. Khattusil If had already addressed himself to 
Kadashman-Enlil II to remind him of the old alliances 


1 §§ 352-366 ; cf. p.296, supra. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE § 3825 


between the Hittites and the Kassite dynasty at the moment 
when Rameses II was seriously threatening Syria. Khattusil 
reminded the young king that on the death of his father, 
Kadashman-Turgu, he had himself written to the nobles of 
Babylon, urging them to recognize Kadashman-Enlil. 
Khattusil complained that the Assyrians and Arameans 
had interfered to slander him at Babylon. He repeated that 
there had been a treaty of alliance and fraternity between 
Kadashman-Turgu and him, and quoted the following 
instance : 


‘““ After the King of Egypt and I were incensed against one another, I 
wrote to thy father in these terms: ‘ The King of Egypt is at war with me.’ 
Then thy father wrote to me: ‘If the troops of the King of Egypt come, 
then I shall go with thee, and . . . I will come in the midst of my soldiers 
and of my chariots.’ Thus thy father was ready to come. And now, O my 
brother, thy warriors call for thee, and say: ‘ Let us go with the warriors 
and the chariots.’ ’” 


But the latter does not seem to have procured a military 
intervention by the Babylonian forces against Egypt; even 
in face of Assyria, Babylon confessed herself impotent. 

The consequence was that Khattusil looked forward to 
the conclusion of hostilities with Egypt, so as to be able to 
husband all his forces for use against the Assyrians and 
to secure if possible the support of Pharaoh in return for an 
equitable division in Syria. This ‘‘ reversal of alliances,’’ 
carried out with decision by Khattusil, culminated in 1279 
B.c. in the famous peace treaty with Rameses II. It is the 
first diplomatic instrument of international high policy that 
human archives have preserved to us. This very important 
monument has by good luck come down to us in a very 
satisfactory state of preservation. The Egyptian version, 
engraved upon the walls of Karnak and the Ramesseum at 
Thebes, has been known since Champollion’s time. The 
recent excavations at Boghaz-Keui have brought to light 
two copies of the Hittite version written in the Babylonian 
tongue.” 

1 Meissner, /.c., 45; Langdon, XIII, VI, p. 202. 
2 Ibid., pp. 45-57. A fresh comparison of the two versions, which 
sometimes diverge from one another in phraseology together with a study 


of the historical conditions of the treaty, has recently been undertaken by 
Gardiner and Langdon, ‘‘ The Treaty of Alliance between Hattusil and 


3826 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


The treaty dates from the middle of the twenty-first year 
of Rameses II. It was negotiated at Boghaz-Keui between 
the Hittite and Egyptian plenipotentiaries. The final text, 
written on a silver tablet sealed with Khattusil’s seal, was 
carried to Pi-Rameses in Egypt by the Hittite messenger 
Tarteshub and the Egyptian messenger Rames. This Hittite 
text leaves the initiative to Khattusil, who formulates the 
proposed clauses; Rameses figures in it only in a secondary 
role. Approved by Pharaoh and Amon, it was deposited in 
the archives and engraved just as it was on the walls of 
Thebes and elsewhere. On his part, Rameses had the 
counterpart written out by his Babylonian scribes; this was 
the Egyptian text, in which he takes the initiative and the 
first place, Khattusil occupying only a subordinate place. 
The text includes most of the phrases of the Hittite minute, 
but omits the personal details referring to Mutallu and intro- 
duces a few trifling modifications. Copied out on a silver 
tablet stamped with Pharaoh’s seal, the Egyptian text was 
despatched to Khattusil and, after the approval of Teshub, 
was inscribed upon bricks and deposited in the archives where 
it was rediscovered by Winckler.? 

Here is a translation of the version preserved in Egypt, 
that in which Khattusil takes the initiative : 


I. Preamble.—In the twenty-first year on the twenty-first day of the first 
month of winter under His Majesty the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, 


Usermara-Setepenra, son of Ra, Rameses-Meriamon .. . on this day when 
His Majesty was in the city of Pi-Rameses . . . then came the messenger of 
the king . . . and the messenger of Khatti.. . bringing (the silver tablet) 


which the great chief of Khatti, Khattusil, had sent to Pharaoh to ask peace 
from His Majesty Rameses. 

Copy of the silver tablet which the great chief of Khatti, Khattusil, has 
sent to Pharaoh by the hand of his messenger Tarteshub and his messenger 
Rames. 


I]. Y7¢le.—Treaty which the great prince of Khatti, Khattusil the strong, 
the son of Mursil, the great chief of Khatti, the strong, the son of the son of 
Shubbiluliuma, the great chief of Khatti, has made on a silver tablet for 
Usermara-Setepenra, the great ruler of Egypt, the strong, the son of Men- 
mara,* the great ruler of Egypt, the strong, the son of the son of the son of 
Menpehtira :* a genuine treaty of peace and fraternity giving peace (and 
fraternity between us by means of a treaty of Khatti with Egypt) for ever. 
SS SNE Ont LD AE NOT ALOT CREE Se TASES AT NT EE 
Rameses II” in XIII, VI, pp. 179-205. I summarize here the results of this 
admirable study. Cf. also Reeder, “ Ac gypten und Hethiter,’ pp. 36 ff., and 
XVII, III, §§ 367 7. 

* Langdon, Jl.c., 199-201. a Seta eh, $ Rameses I. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE 327 


Ill. Previous Treaties.—In the past and from all eternity as concerns the 
situation of the great ruler of Egypt and of the great chief of Khatti, god had 
not permitted that there should be war between them thanks to a treaty. But 
in the time of Mutallu, the great chief of Khatti, my brother, the latter 
warred (against Rameses-Meriamon), the great ruler of Egypt. And so, 
henceforth, dating from this day, behold, Khattusil, the great chief of 
Khatti, has made a treaty to render permanent the situation which Phra has 
created, and which Sutekhu has created for the land of Egypt with the land 
of Khatti so as not to allow of hostilities existing between them for ever. 


IV. Present Treaty.—Then Khattusil, the great chief of Khatti, has him- 
self made a treaty with the great ruler of Egypt, Usermara-Setepenra, to 
date from this day to establish a real peace and a real fraternity between us 
for ever. And he is in fraternity with me and at peace with me, and I, I 
am in fraternity with him and at peace with him for ever. 

And the children’s children of the great chief of Khatti shall be in 
fraternity and at peace with the children’s children of Rameses-Meriamon, 
the great ruler of Egypt, being in our position of fraternity and peace. 
And the land of Egypt with the land of Khatti is at peace and in frater- 
nity, as we are for ever, and hostilities shall exist no more between them 
ever. 


V. Mutual Prohibition of Invasion.—The great chief of Khatti shall not 
invade the land of Egypt to plunder anything there ever; and Usermara- 
Setepenra shall not invade the land of Khatti to plunder anything there 
ever. And as to the regular treaty which existed in the time of Shubbilu- 
liuma, the great chief of Khatti, and likewise with the regular treaty which 
existed in the time of Mutallu, the great chief of Khatti, my brother, I will 
uphold them. Behold then, Rameses-Meriamon, the great ruler of Egypt, 
upholds the peace made between us from this day, and we will act in con- 
formity with this regular situation. 


VI. Defensive Alliance against an Enemy Abroad.—lf any other enemy 
come into the lands of Usermara-Setepenra, the great ruler of Egypt, and if 
he send unto the great chief of Khatti to say: ‘‘ Come with me to aid me 
against him,” the great chief of Khatti shall come with him, the great chief 
of Khatti shall slay his enemy. But if it be not the will of the great chief 
of Khatti to come (in person), he shall send his soldiers and his chariots and 
shall slay his enemy. 


VII. Common Action against Rebellious Subjects.—If Rameses-Meriamon, 
the great ruler of Egypt, have cause for anger against his own subjects, and 
if they do any act of offence against him, and if he set out to slay his 
enemy, the great chief of Khatti shall act in conjunction with him to destroy 
anyone against whom they have cause for anger. 


VIII, IX, X. (Here follow reciprocal clauses providing for Rameses’ help 
against an attack from abroad or a revolt among Khattusil’s subjects and a 
mutilated clause relating to the succession to the throne in the two 
countries.) 


XI. Extradition of Important Fugitives—lf{ a great lord flee from the 
land of Egypt and come to the land of the great chief of Khatti, or if it 


828 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


be a city or a district belonging to the territories of Rameses-Meriamon, the 
great ruler of Egypt, that comes to the great chief of Khatti, the great chief 
of Khatti shall not receive the same, The great chief of Khatti shall have 
him brought to Usermara-Setepenra, the great ruler of Egypt. 


XII. Extradition of Common People.—Or if it be a man or two men 
whom none know at all, who flee . . . and if they come to the land of Khatti 
to be the servants of another, they shall not be tolerated in the land of 
Khatti, but they shall be brought to Rameses-Meriamon, the great ruler of 
Egypt. 


XIII-XIV. (Reciprocal clauses relating to Hittite refugees.) 


XV. The Hittite and Egyptian Deities Witnesses to the Treaty.—For all 
the words in the treaty made by the great chief of Khatti with Rameses- 
Meriamon, the great ruler of Egypt, written on a silver tablet, lo, for all 
these words a thousand deities male and female of those of the land of 
Khatti, with a thousand deities male and female of those of the land of 
Egypt, they are with me as witnesses to these words; the sun, lord of heaven, 
the sun of the city of Arinna.? Sutekhu, lord of heaven, Sutekhu of Khatti 
(then follow eleven other Sutekhus), Astarte of the land of Khattj (here follow 
ten other deities), the queen of heaven, the gods, masters of the oath, the 
goddesses mistresses of the oath, the mistress of the oath Ishara, the mistresses 
of the mountains and the rivers of the land of Khatti, the deities of the 
land of Kizwadana, Amon, Phra, Sutekhu, the deities male and female, the 
mountains and rivers of the land of Egypt, the heavens, the earth, the great 
sea, the winds, the clouds. 


XVI. Comminatory Clause against Anyone who does not observe the 
Lreaty.—All these words written on this silver tablet of the land of Khatti 
and the land of Egypt, whosoever shall not observe them, a thousand gods 
of the land of Khatti and a thousand gods of the land of Egypt shall 
destroy his house, his land, and his servants. On the other hand, whosoever 
shall observe these words which are on this silver tablet, be he Hittite or 
Egyptian, and whosoever shall not neglect them, a thousand deities of the 
land of Khatti and a thousand deities of the land of Egypt shall cause him to 
be in good health and to live, him and his houses and his land and his 
servants. 


XVII. Amnesty for Persons Extradited.—lf a man flee from the land of 
Egypt, or two or three, and if they come to the great chief of Khatti, the 
great chief of Khatti shall arrest them and shall have them sent to Usermara- 
Setepenra, the great ruler of Egypt. But, as for the man who shall be 
brought to Rameses-Meriamon, the great ruler of Egypt, let not his fault 
be imputed to him, nor let his house nor his wives nor his children be 
destroyed, nor let his eyes, his ears, his mouth, nor his limbs be injured,? 
nor let any accusation be brought against him, 


XVIII. (Reciprocal clause respecting Hittite refugees.) 





* Patron deity of the Hittite royal family; Arinna lies to the south of the 
Anti-Taurus on the river Sarus in Cappadocia. 
* Mutilations included among the judicial penalties. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE = 329 


XIX. Description of the Silver Tablet.—This is what is in the centre of 


the silver tablet : 
oO 


Obverse : a figure consisting of a likeness of Sutekhu embracing a likeness 
of the great prince of Khatti encircled by a legend saying: Seal of Sutekhu, 
the ruler of heaven, seal of the treaty made by Khattusil, the great chief 
of Khatti, the strong, the son of Mursil, the great chief of Khatti, the 
strong. What is within the border which frames the relief is the seal of 
Sutekhu. 

Reverse : a figure consisting of a female likeness of the goddess of Khatti 
embracing a female likeness of the princess of Khatti encircled by a legend 
saying: Seal of the Sun of the city of Arinna, lord of the land, seal of 
Pudukhepa, princess of the land of Khatti, daughter of the land of Kiz- 
wadana priestess (?) of the city of Arinna, mistress of the land, servant of 


the goddess. What is within the border which frames the relief is the seal 
of the Sun of Arinna, lord of the whole land. (C/. Fig. 40.) 


Such a document speaks for itself ; we need not emphasize 
the tone of perfect equality and sincere fraternity which 
has been established quite naturally between the haughty 
Pharaoh and the ‘‘ defeated wretch of Khatti,’’ nor on the 
ingenuity and complexity of the phraseology providing the 
prototype for subsequent treaties of the world’s history. Let 
us just note the final clause, in which the deities of the 
cities and those of Nature participate as witnesses to and 
guarantors for the treaty ; in this respect at least we are still 
within the mental environment of primitive peoples. Above 
the armies drawn up for battle and the diplomatists seated 
at the council table we perceive the great divine figures 
created by the imagination of Hittites and Egyptians, some- 
times struggling in mortal combat, sometimes treating one 
another as allies and brothers. 

In the archives of Boghaz-Keui we have good written 
evidence which leaves no room to doubt that this pact re- 
flected the secret desires of the two allies. It is curious that 
no geographical delimitation of frontiers should have been 
laid down in the treaty. We shall admit with the majority 
of historians that the Hittites kept Syria as far south as 
Kadesh, while the Egyptians retained Palestine and the 
coastal towns as far north as Byblos or thereabouts. But it 
may apparently be inferred from this very omission that 
Rameses and Khattusil wanted to give themselves the 


330 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


illusion and, above all, to make the rest of the world believe 
that their forces were thenceforth indissolubly united and 
that their two empires would form but one for ever. 

Such is the conclusion warranted by several letters dis- 
covered at Boghaz-Keui. One emanates from the Egyptian 
Queen, Naptera. She writes to “her sister,’? the Hittite 
Queen Pudukhepa, heiress to the land of Kizwadana, whom 
Khattusil respected almost as an equal : 


“* I (Naptera), thy sister, am well and my land is well. As for thee, my 
sister, mayest thou be well and may thy land be well. Now, I have heard 
that my sister has written to me to have news of me and that she has written 





The god Teshub in , : 
Egyptian dress. Kadesh. bracing the king O 
Khatti. 





Fic. 40.—HITTITE AND SyRIAN DEITIES. 


to me about the situation of true peace and true fraternity of the great 
king, the King of Egypt, with the great king, the King of Khatti, his 
brother. May Ra and Teshub raise up thy head. Ra shall grant, for good, 
peace and true fraternity between the great king, the King of Egypt, and the 
great king, the King of Khatti, his brother, for all eternity. As for me, I am 
in the friendship of sisterhood with the great queen, my sister, and I am so 
to-day for all eternity.’”? 


The same tone is sounded in a letter sent by Rameses II 
to the King of Mira (a country in Asia Minor which cannot 
yet be exactly located): 


** Know that the text of the oath which I have sworn for the great King 
of Khatti, my brother, is laid at the feet [of the god Teshub], and the 
i mrt et eal he Oe ee, ee 

1 Meissner, J.c., pp. 59-60. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE 331 


great gods are witnesses thereto. Know that the text of the oath which the 
great King of Khatti has sworn for me is deposited at the feet of Ra, and the 
great gods are witnesses thereto. I am faithful to this oath and I shall 
not put it aside. As for thee, believe not the false words thou hast heard 
[on this subject]. Know that in the true condition of peace and fraternity 
in which I now am with the great King of Khatti, I will abide therein for 
all eternity.’” 


Khattusil pursued the same tactics with his neighbours. 
He wrote to the King of Babylon, Kadashman-Enlil IT: 


““ The King of Egypt and I have contracted an alliance and have become 
brothers. We give you to know what follows: ‘ We are brothers and we 


will be the enemies of our common enemy, and the friends of our common 
SELON Sy cst 


Then Khattusil shows against what enemy this alliance 
with Rameses was directed and in what direction he expects 
to carry the King of Babylon: 


“I have learnt that my brother has now become a man, and that he is 
passionately fond of hunting. I am greatly rejoiced that Teshub has 
rendered prosperous my brother’s posterity. For this reason march and 
ravage thy enemy’s land. When I hear that my brother has slain his enemy, 
then shall I say of my brother : ‘ He is a king who knows how to bear arms.’ 
Let not my brother hesitate, let him march against his enemy’s land. Slay 
the enemy. ... March against a land in comparison wherewith thou art 
three times, four times superior,’’® 


No doubt Assyria is here referred to, but it was a long 
journey for the messengers who went from Naharina to 
Babylon, and they had to travel along the Assyrian frontiers ; 
despatches were often intercepted. And so Khattusil men- 
tions no names; but each saw clearly into the other’s game. 

Besides these political relations, commercial transactions 
were not overlooked. The Hittites possessed mines, and the 
Hittites were in voluntary or forced relations with those 
Asianics to whom the Achezans and the Dorians from Europe 
were bringing iron and then steel, those metals, hitherto 
almost unknown among Oriental peoples, which were going 
to revolutionize armaments and industrial equipment and 
prepare the way for changes in the supremacy. Rameses II, 
who was fully alive to the importance of such questions, had 
written to Khattusil to secure iron from the land of Kizwa- 
dana. Khattusil replies with more or less sincerity : 


1 Meissner, /.c., p. 58. 1 700d... |p. 00, 2 loid.,.p. 60. 


3832 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


‘““As for the pure iron about which thou writest to me, I have no pure 
iron in my magazines in Kizwadana. The moment is not opportune for the 
manufacture of iron. Nevertheless, I have written ordering the manufacture 
of pure iron. As yet it is not finished, but, as soon as it is, I shall send 
it thee. To-day I send thee only an iron dagger.’” 


Such good relations must, as in the days of the entente 
with Mitanni, culminate in an alliance by blood. In the 
thirty-fourth year of his reign (1266 B.c.) Rameses II married 
one of the daughters of Khattusil, whom the Hittite king 
conducted in person right to Egypt. Never before had any 
great king of Asia made such a journey, which surpassed the 
normal limits of Court politeness and smacked strongly of an 
act of vassalage. The impression produced in Egypt was 
profound and is reflected in the official documents. On a 
great stele in the temple of Abusimbel the god Phtah of 
Memphis quotes, among the signal benefits which he has 
accorded to the king, the fact that ‘** the land of Khatti was 
among the subjects of his palace.’’ 


‘“T have put it in their hearts to come themselves with their tribute 
which their chiefs have levied as first fruits of their own possessions for thy 
person. His eldest daughter? is at their head to satisfy the heart of Thy 
Majesty. Mysterious marvel, she knows not the amiable design which I 
have brought to fruition for thy desire.... Nothing (like thereto) had 
been heard of since (the time) of the gods. Secret annals exist in the 
libraries from the days of Ra to Thy Majesty, but that the land of Khatti 
should conceive its destiny with a single heart with Egypt, that had never 
been known.’ 


The full account of Khattusil’s journey* to Egypt is 
engraved upon the walls of the portico of Abusimbel. 


Rameses recalls that Khattusil had once demanded a permanent peace 
(“‘ from year to year’’), and that he had planned to send him presents with 
his eldest daughter. A papyrus of this epoch describes in poetic style the 
supposed preparations made by Khattusil. The latter had written to the 
prince of Kodi (Cilicia) to say : ‘* Make thee ready that we may go to Egypt. 
The word of the god has been made manifest ;° let us make overtures to 
Rameses, He gives the breath of life to those whom he loves and so every 
land is at his disposal and Khatti is in his power alone: if the god receive 








1 Méissner,'J.2., p. 61. * Khattusil’s daughter. 

* Cf. XVII, III, § 410 (Lepsius, Denkmaler, IIT, 194). 

* The text is unfortunately in a bad state of preservation and inadequately 
published (Lepsius, Denkm., III, 196, and Bouriant in IV, XVIII, 164; cf. 
Breasted, American Journal of Semitic Languages (Oct., 1906), p. 8, and 
XVIII, III, §§ 415-428. 

* That is, Teshub had authorized the journey and the marriage. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE = 333 


not his offerings, Khatti shall not see the water of heaven again; for it is 
in the power of Rameses.”* Then Khattusil will set on the march with his 
daughter and his vassals and a whole retinue and a convoy of vehicles. 
When they arrived at Zahi, the Egyptian administrators wrote to Pharaoh 
to get instructions: ‘‘ Behold, the great prince of Khatti arrives with 
his daughter and many presents of all sorts. And behold the prince of 
Khatti and the prince [of Kodi and the men] of Khatti are bringing them 
after traversing many mountains and difficult ways to reach His Majesty’s 
frontiers.’’? 

His Majesty received this message in his palace with joy in his heart 
and having heard such strange and unexpected news, he gave orders to his 
army and princes to receive the visitors in haste. Then he took counsel 
with himself and said: ‘* Who are these new arrivals? Now, a messenger 
cannot go to Zahi at this season of rain upon the high mountains in winter !” 
Then he went to take counsel of the god Sutekhu, him ‘‘ who makes rain and 
cold on the [mountains].’? The oracle reassured him and soon the Hittite 
company “‘ arrived safe and sound and marching quick step. The daughter of 
the great chief of Khatti was marching at the head of the army [of Pharaoh], 
and all were mingled with the foot-soldiers and the horses of Khatti, and 
all, Hittite warriors and Egyptian soldiers, [welcomed with feasts] ate and 
drank face to face without fighting. ... Then the great chiefs of all the 
lands came and prostrated themselves before His Majesty.”’ 


The marriage was celebrated forthwith. Rameses gave 
the princess the rank of great royal wife with the royal 
cartouche and a solar name. Henceforth she was called 
‘© The-great-one-who-sees-the-beauties-of-the-Sun *’ (Urtmau- 
neferura). At the top of the stele which describes the 
marriage—a stone marriage notice the text of which spreads 
over forty-one lines along a length of 100 metres—Rameses, 
seated on his throne in a naos, is receiving the worship of his 
new wife, dressed in Egyptian costume, and of the great 
Prince of Khatti, who has kept the long robe and pointed 
tiara of his country (Fig. 41). 

From the marriage of Rameses with the Hittite princess 
one daughter was born. In a letter discovered at Boghaz- 
Keui the hope is expressed that Rameses may some day 
bring her to the Hittites’ land, where she would be given a 
kingdom.*® We do not know whether this family visit was 
paid. In any case, an inscription drawn up in the Persian 
period has preserved the memory of the despatch of a 


1 A survival of the belief in the king’s magic power of making rain. 

2 Pap. Anastasi, II, Pl. 2, i, 1-5; Maspero, XX, II, p. 404; cf. XVII, IIT, 
§ 426. A description of the Hittite cortége is also given on a stele discovered 
at Coptos; cf. XVII, III, § 428. 

3 Meissner, /.c., p. 63. 


8384 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


magician and a god to the land of Bekhten (Naharina?) to 
cure Bentresh, the royal princess of the country.’ 

The Prince of Bekhten (he is called the Great Hittite), 
who has given his eldest daughter, Neferura, to Pharaoh to 
be his bride, implores the aid of his mighty son-in-law and 
ally to deliver one of his daughters who had stayed at home 
from an evil spirit which possessed her. The magician whom 
Pharaoh first sends loses his science abroad. Then the king 
sends from Thebes the statue of the god Khonsu with a great 
retinue. After a journey lasting a year and five months 





Fic. 41.—TuHeEe HITTITE KING AND HIS DAUGHTER ADORING RAMESES II 
(ABUSIMBEL). 


Khonsu is brought before the possessed princess, exorcises 
the demon, and compels him to flee, though not without 
eranting him honourable terms of capitulation.” The event 
was regarded as legendary until the discovery of the Tell-el- 
Amarna letters. They contained evidence that such inter- 
changes of doctors, magicians, and healers between the 
sovereigns of Thebes and Babylon and their Asiatic allies 
were common occurrences and that at times the deities came 
in person. In his last sickness Amenophis III had implored 
that the goddess Ishtar, ‘* the dear lady of Nineveh,”’ might 
come to him. Questioned by Dushratta, she had graciously 
said: ** I am willing to go to Egypt, the land which my heart 
loveth.’? Dushratta accordingly sent her, with the prayer 
that she might grant his dear friend a hundred thousand 
years of life.* The stele of Bentresh describes in the guise of 


1 Stele of the princess of Bekhten from the temple of Khonsu at Karnak 
(Champollion, WMotices descriptives, II, 280). 


2 Cf. Maspero, Contes populaires, p. 185; XVII, III, §§ 432-437. 
3 Cf. Niebuhr, ‘‘ Die Amarna-Zeit”’ (in Die Alte Ortent, 1903), p. 16. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE 335 


a legend a similar episode in the family relations between 
the Court of Rameses II and that of the Hittites (cf. Dela- 
porte, Mesopotamia, p. 284). 


To recapitulate, then, we may say that for half a century 
—roughly from 1279 to 1250 B.c.—the entente between the 
Courts of Thebes and Boghaz-Keui had replaced the Egyp- 
tian Empire by an Egypto-Hittite condominium which, 
honestly worked, seems to have established peace in the 
East. 

However, the deaths of Khattusil (about 1255 3s.c.) and 
of Rameses II (about 1284 3B.c.) coincided with a sudden 
and profound enfeeblement of this hegemony on two sides. 
Khattusil’s son Dudhalia, and his grandson Arnuanta, were 
sovereigns without glory, whose authority and possessions 
crumbled away so completely that after them the Hittite 
kingdom, in a sense, disappeared from history (1255-1200). 
The Boghaz-Keui archives cease abruptly after Khattusil’s 
reign ; it does not look as if this cessation was fortuitous; as 
in the case of Tell-el-Amarna, it is to be explained by the 
total eclipse of the royal administration. At the same time 
the Assyrians, led by Tukulti-Inurta I (1260-1240 B.c.), 
crushed the Hittites’ ally, the dynasty of Babylon, occupied 
the old capital for seven years, and began to restore the 
union of the Semitic peoples in Mesopotamia. To the north 
and west they set foot in Commagene and on the banks 
of the Upper Euphrates, attacking the southern Hittite 
provinces on the flank. However, it was not the Assyrians 
who struck the first decisive blow at the kings of Boghaz- 
Keui. Once more the irresistible, but to some extent name- 
less, power of a vast migration of peoples swept away the 
attempts at empire and introduced fresh elements into 
Oriental politics. 


* G. Contenau, ‘ The Hittites” in Mercure de France (Mar. 1, 1922), 
p. 386. 


336 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


IV 
Tue PEOPLES OF THE NORTH AND OF THE SEA IN THE EAST 


It was towards the end of the thirteenth century— 
roughly from 12380 to 1195 B.c.—that a new wave in the 
migration of Aryan peoples come from Europe broke upon 
the coasts and maritime provinces of Asia Minor, Syria, 
Palestine, and Egypt. There are no texts to enlighten us as 
to the causes or origins of the invasions, but archeological 
data afford abundant testimony to a general upheaval in the 
Mediterranean world. During the course of the thirteenth 
century the Achzans, equipped with iron weapons and im- 
plements, arrived in the Peloponnese and the isles from 
Thessaly. They overwhelmed the Myceneans’ cities, crushed 
or drove out the AXgean peoples, and, following hot on their 
heels, hurled themselves across the islands right to the coasts 
of Syria and Libya. From Marmarica to the Bosphorus a 
whirlwind of human masses raged hither and thither for half 
a century ; whole peoples migrated, long-established popula- 
tions were expelled, newcomers established themselves often 
by successive colonizations in sites comparatively remote 
from their starting-point. The consequence was the end of 
the Mycenzan hegemony in the Mediterranean, the ruin of 
the Hittite Empire, the incurable decadence of Egypt, not to 
the advantage of the new intruders, but rather to the profit 
of peoples already organized—the Assyrians and_ subse- 
quently the Persians. 

The detailed examination of the cataclysm in the Medi- 
terranean belongs to M. Glotz’s book in this series; here we 
shall only consider its general consequences from the point of 
view of the empires of the East and of Egypt in particular. 

From the beginning of the XI Xth Dynasty the storm had 
been threatening the coasts of Egypt, but at a point which 
for centuries had caused Pharaoh no serious anxiety—the 
north-west frontier on the coast of Libya. It is evident that 
by the end of the fourteenth century the shores of Libya had 
been assailed by Mediterranean pirates and invaders, who 
had driven the African tribes before them to the assault on 
Egypt.? Seti I had had to repulse two attacks on the Delta 


1 The triumphal hymn of Thothmes III already names side by side the 
Libyans and the Utenau ‘‘ come from the Isles’”’ (supra, p. 279). 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE _ 337 


by the Libyans.' Rameses, in his turn, defeated them, and 
was surprised to capture among their ranks numerous “‘ Shar- 
dana, come from the midst of the Sea,’’? whom the Egyptians 
had encountered in the ports of Syria in the time of the 
XVIUth Dynasty (vide supra, p. 290). He made use of 
these barbarians, enrolling them among the Egyptian militia, 
where they fought valiantly in the campaign against the 
Hittites (supra, p. 813). As for the Libyans, Rameses could 
not prevent their peaceable intrusion into the Delta, where 
they installed themselves as half-sedentary tribes round 
Memphis and Heliopolis as well as in the oases.? They 





Libyan. Assyrian. 


Fic. 42.—T wo New ADVERSARIES OF EGyPT. 


remained in contact with the migrants of the Mediterranean, 
whom the Egyptian texts will henceforth call ‘the Peoples 
of the North ”’ and ‘‘ Peoples from the Sea.’’ 

The Peoples of the North and of the Sea attempted an 
invasion of Egypt on two occasions. 

The first time was almost immediately after the death of 
Rameses II, in the fifth year of his son and successor, the 
already ageing Pharaoh Merneptah (1229 z.c.). In a time of 
perfect peace a torrent of peoples coming from Libya flooded 
the western frontiers of the Delta. Among them the Egyp- 
tian texts mention the Lycians and the Shardana, whom we 


2 XVII, III, §§ 122-139. 2 loid., § 491. 3 /bia@.; § 570. 
22 


338 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


know well, and who reached the shores of Africa from the 
coasts of Asia Minor; then for the first time in history appear 
the names of the Achzeans (Akawasha)' and the Etruscans 
(Twrsha), the one come from Thessaly, the others probably 
sprung from the Tyrseni of Lemnos, who travelled from Asia 
to Italy with the Siculans (recognizable under the name 
Shakalasha, from Sagalassos in Pisidia). With the Acheans 
we see what we call the European races entering upon the 
stage of world history.” In addition to their physical type, 
markedly different from that of other Orientals, the dis- 
tinguishing marks of the newcomers were their iron swords 
and tools, their body armour, and their metal greaves,° which 
make the warriors ev«v7/pdes—well greaved. The Egyptians 
proudly enumerated such trophies among the spoils taken on 
the battlefield. 

Just as the peoples from the Troad had attached them- 
selves to the Hittite organization, so the Achzans, Etruscans, 
Shardana, Siculans, and Lycians had been incorporated in a 
Libyan army for this war against Merneptah. In it we recog- 
nize the names of old tribes, the Temhu and the Mashuasha, 
already employed as mercenaries by Rameses Il. But we 
see the genuine Libyans (Libu) also appearing, tall bar- 
barians with white skin, fair hair, and blue eyes, whose 
northern origin is betrayed by these physical marks. They 
had the same armament as the Egyptians and, like them, 
used the horse and the war-chariot. Their names and those 
of their chiefs exactly recall those of the Numidians of 
classical history. There is no doubt that an invading stream 
coming from the Atlas region, and possibly Europe, swept 
along in its wake a certain number of Berber clans.* This 
intelligent and sturdy race came to take command of the 
heterogeneous mass which the Mediterranean had just cast 
up upon the shores of Libya. 

About the month of April, 1229 s.c., Merneptah at 


1 With the mention of ‘‘ Akawasha of the sea’’ (XVII, III, §§ 508-601), 
and ‘‘ Twrsha of the sea’’ (/.c., § 129). 

2 Maspero, XX, II, pp. 430 #.; Hall, XIX, 376. An excellent historical 
account of our knowledge of these peoples is given by Hall, ‘‘ The Peoples of 
the Sea’? in the Recueil des Etudes égyptologiques dédiées a J]. F. 
Champollion (1922). 

8 The Achzans, the Shardana, and the Philistines, possessed such iron 
Weapons. ‘ Maspero, XX, II, 430. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE 339 


Memphis learned that ‘‘ the King of the Libyans, Meryey, 
was coming from the land of Tehenu with his archers and a 
coalition of ‘ Peoples of the North,’ composed of Shardana, 
Siculans, Achzans, Lycians, and Etruscans, bringing the 
pick of the warriors of each country.’’ His aim was to attack 
the western frontier of Egypt in the plains of Perir.! The 
danger was all the graver since the province of Palestine was 
itself affected by the disturbance. Indeed, it looks as if 
the Hittites had been embroiled in the turmoil, although 
Merneptah had continued his good offices on their behalf, 
** sending them wheat by his ships at the time of a dearth, 
to make the land of Khatti live.’? Pharaoh went to take 
advice from the image of Phtah; the god sent him an en- 
couraging dream and advised him to attack. The battle 
lasted six hours, during which the Egyptian archers inflicted 
great slaughter upon the barbarians. Meryey fled at top 
speed, abandoning his arms, his treasures, and his harem. 
On the picture the artist has entered among the slain 6,359 
Libyans, 222 Siculans, 742 Etruscans, and Shardana and 
Acheans by thousands; more than 9,000 swords and pieces 
of armour and a great booty were captured on the battlefield. 

Merneptah engraved a hymn of victory on the walls of his 
mortuary temple at Thebes, in which he described the panic 
among his enemies. ‘‘ Among the Libyans the young men 
said one to the other of the victories, ‘ We have had none 
since the days of Ra,’ and the old man said to his son, ‘ Alas! 
poor Libya!’ The Tehenu have been consumed in a single 
year.’’ And the other provinces outside Egypt were also 
reduced to obedience. ‘*‘ Tehenu is laid waste, Khatti is 
pacified, Canaan is pillaged, Ascalon is despoiled, Gezer is 
captured, Yenoam is annihilated, Israel is made desolate and 
has no more any crops, Kharu is become like a widow (with- 
out support) over against Egypt. All the countries are 
unified and pacified.’”® 


We must not take Merneptah’s words at their face value, 
for shortly after his death (1224 B.c.) Egypt fell into a state 


1 XVII, III, §§ 579 7. 2 Ibid., § 530. 

* Fl. Petrie and Spiegelburg, Six Temples at Thebes, Pls. XIII and XIV; 
cf. XVII, III, §617. This is the famous Stele of Jsrael where, for the 
first time as far as we know, the name of Israel appears in an Egyptian text. 


340 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


of utter anarchy, which a contemporary document describes 
in the following terms: ‘‘ The land of Egypt was abandoned, 
and every man in it was robbed of his rights, and there was 
no longer any (supreme) head for many years until other 
times arrived. The land of Egypt was in the power of the 
great ones and rulers of the cities, each slaying his neighbour, 
great or small. Other times came thereafter, years of distress 
when Iarsu, a Canaanite (kharu), fulfilled the function of a 
prince. He held the old land before him under his sole 
command; he kept his partisans united and ravaged the 
goods (of others).’”? 

In these troubled times the frontiers of Egypt were badly 
guarded; at least, in the Delta we see moving about freely 
those Libyan and Asiatic tribes for whom Egypt in her 
moments of weakness was always such a tempting prey. 
There were also in the land, numbered by hundreds of 
thousands, prisoners of war brought from Syria, Palestine, 
and Libya, engaged in heavy labour in the mines or stone 
quarries. In such political circumstances they would revolt, 
plunder the country, or return to their own lands. According 
to traditions gathered by the Greek historians, some Baby- 
lonians captured by Sesostris (Rameses II?) rebelled and 
built themselves a city near Memphis, in which they were 
masters and which they called Babylon; so some Trojan 
captives founded the city Troiu (Turah) in the same region.’ 
Some Israelites found themselves to the east of the Delta 
under similar conditions; they, too, seized the favourable 
moment for escaping from the persecution of their con- 
querors, and this was the Ewodus. Many historians place 
it at the epoch of Merneptah.’ However, the stele quoted 
above, which mentions Israel in Canaan in the days of that 
Pharaoh, provides an argument in favour of an Exodus com- 
pleted by the end of the XVIIIth Dynasty, at the moment 
when the Khabiri (Hebrews?) of the Amarna letters were 
joining their forces with those of the Hittites to undermine 
Egyptian power in Palestine.* 

The royal power was not re-established in Egypt till the 
beginning of the XXth Dynasty with the accession of 

1 Great apres Papyrus, Pl. LXXV, ll. 2-5; XVII, IV, § 398. 

2 Diodorus, I, 56; cf. Maspero, XX, II, p. 441. 

3 XX, Il, pp. 442 ff. ‘ On this see Hall, XIX, 403 7. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE 341 


Rameses III (1200-1169 B.c.). This prince was the last of 
the great Pharaohs. He strove to imitate his great ancestor, 
Rameses II, in all his actions, and most especially in the 
arduous task of restoring, if not the empire, at least the 
prestige of Egypt. 

Rameses III soon had occasion to show his valour as a 
soldier. In the fifth year of his reign (1195) the Libyan 
invasion recommenced. The Libyans and the Mashausha, 
led by the same chiefs as in the days of Merneptah, were 
massed on the western frontier of the Delta ; new tribes from 
the North reinforced them. ‘ The Peoples of the North were 
all restless, the Philistines (Pulestiu) and the Zekal among 
the rest : they made war at once by sea and on land.’?! The 
Philistines, wearing cuirasses like the Acheans and the Shar- 
dana, came from Caria. After having sojourned in Crete, 
they ventured upon the coasts of Libya; later we shall meet 
them again in Palestine with the Zekal (perhaps Siculans), 
who also came from Caria or Cilicia, and who had also 
travelled by way of Crete.? Their adventure succeeded no 
better than before: Rameses III inflicted a great slaughter 
upon them and enumerated more than 12,000 carcasses 
belonging both to Libyans and men of the North. 

In the eighth year (1192) the southward pressure of 
migrations from Europe was intensified ; this time the flood 
burst upon Syria. The cataclysm assumed formidable pro- 
portions. ‘* The Peoples [of the North] were restless in their 
isles, disturbed among themselves at one and the same time. 
No land could withstand them; the land of the Hittites, 
Kodi, Carchemish, Arvad, and Alasya were ravaged. They 
made them a single camp in the land of Amurru . . . and 
came with fire prepared before them towards Egypt. Their 
main supports were the Philistines, the Zekal, the Shaga- 
lasha, the Danzxans, and the Uashasha.’ All these peoples 

1 Inscription of Medinet-Habu; cf. XVII, IV, 44. 

* Hall, ‘“‘ The Peoples of the Sea” in Recueil Champollion (1922). 

8’ The Shavdana who also formed part of the invaders are not the tribes 
already acclimatized as mercenaries in Egypt, but a fresh contingent coming 
“‘from the sea’? (XVII, IV, § 129). The Uashasha (in whom it has been 
proposed to recognize the Oscans, but who are more likely natives of Caria 
—XX, II, 464, n. 5) are also “ from the sea” like the Shardana (XVII, IV, 
§ 403). The Danegans came “ from their isles” (J.c., § 403). On all these 


peoples see the discussions of Weill in XI (1922), and Hall ‘‘ The Peoples of 
the Sea” in Recueil Champollion (1922). 


342 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


were united and had laid their hands upon the land as far 
as the Circle of the Earth. Their hearts were confident 
and full of ambition.’?! The Egyptian bas-reliefs show us 
sketches drawn from life of these formidable masses in move- 
ment. ‘There we see the Philistines, recognizable by their 
swords, their armour, and their plumed turbans, forming 
convoys on disembarking from their ships with their clumsy 
chariots with solid wheels and drawn by four oxen, on which 


G4 


AY 5 ye WE. &y/ 






on 
\ WA AS S 
PASS x Wage 





MN te “KEE 
7Y Sy Lb KER ed 
i {ors 
ify a 






Ws 
SS 


Ss 
SS 






a, 
Ty, QE NE A 
pe ACE. 


Ml Yr. HN 


Fic. 43.—A PHILISTINE CONVOY ATTACKED BY THE SHARDANA. 


are piled higgledy-piggledy children, women, furniture, pro- 
visions—all the squalid baggage of a migrant people (Fig. 43). 
By land and by sea, too, this confused horde gravitated 
slowly towards Egypt. 

Rameses III hastened to prepare his army. ‘“ He 
strengthened the frontier of Zahi, put the ports in a con- 
dition for defence, protected them, as with a wall, by war- 
ships and transports filled from prow to stern with valiant 
warriors.” Then he took command of the troops. The 
Egyptian fleet and army fell upon the Peoples of the Sea 
gathered simultaneously on land and sea in some indeter- 
minable port in Syria. ‘‘ Those who have violated my 
frontier have no more grain, their heart and their soul are 


1 Brugsh, Thesaurus, pp. 1207 7f.; XVII, IV, § 64. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE 348 


‘dNY’J OL VAS FHL AO SATAOUG AHL AO SLUWNALLY AHL ASINdAA AWAY AGNV LAATIY NVILdADY AH L— pF “914 





844 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


perished for ever. As for those of them who were massed 
upon the sea, a devouring flame came before them in the 
harbours, and on the shore a wall of iron encircled them.? 
They were slaughtered, overthrown upon the beach, and their 
vessels, capsized, let their riches fall out into the waters.’ 

Egypt therefore miraculously escaped the invasion, and 
the Peoples of the Sea were for the most part driven back 
upon the isles and Italy. As to the Hittites and the 
Amorites, who had been swept in their wake into Palestine, 
they had to be driven back northwards. This was the object 
of the campaign on the Orontes, in which Rameses III 
attacked a certain number of towns in Amurru and pushed 
on as far as Shabtuna,? a few miles below Kadesh. In 
general Pharaoh’s enemies are called ‘‘ Asiatics’’ (Settiu), 
but sometimes the defenders are Hittites. In the lists of the 
conquered inscribed on the walls of the mortuary temple of 
Rameses III at Medinet-Habu the names of Carchemish and 
Mitanni* are to be read, but it may be questioned whether 
these are not just copied from the bas-reliefs of Rameses II 
and historically valueless as applied to the present reign. 
On the other hand, in Palestine appear names such as Jacob- 
El, Joseph-El, and Levi-El,’ which indicate the presence of 
Israelite tribes in Canaan. The date of this campaign is 
doubtful; probably operations were drawn out from the 
eighth to the eleventh year of Rameses III. 

We do not know what was the practical effect of these 
victories upon the Peoples of the North and of the Sea. By 
putting affairs in order Rameses was enabled for a few years 
to recover possession of Canaan, which included the Shep- 
helah and Zahi; in the Great Harris Papyrus occurs a refer- 
ence to a joint temple to Rameses III and Amon, erected in 
a city of Zahi, Pe-Canaan.° 

But this southern province, which alone survived to recall 
the heroic days of the Egyptian Empire, was to a large 
measure occupied by those of the Peoples of the Sea and of 
the North who had accepted Pharaoh’s service while retain- 

* These are metaphors of Oriental style; the devouring flame means the 


ardour of the Egyptian fleet, the wall of metal is the Egyptian army drawn 
up facing the invaders. 

* XVII, IV, §§ 65-66. * Thid., § 181. 

* Lbid., §§ 116 7. ° lbtid., § 181. 

° Lbid,, § 219. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE 345 


APPROXIMATE SYNCHRONISMS BETWEEN REIGNS FROM 
1350 TO 1180 B.C, 




















B.C. EGYPT 
1350 
Horemheb, 
1345-1321 
1340 
1330 
1320 Seti I, 
1319-1300 
1310 
1300 Rameses II, 
1300-1234, 
1295, Battle of 
Kadesh 
1290 
1279, Hittite 
treaty 
1280 
1270 
1266, Marriage 
with Hittite 
princess 
1260 
1250 
1240 
Merneptah, 
1235-1224 
1230 
1229, Libyan 
INVASION 
1220 
1210 
1200 Rameses III, 
1200-1169. 
1195, Libyan 
invasion 
1193, Invasion 
by Peoples of 
the Sea 
1190 


1180 











KHATTI 


Mursil, 
1360-1330 


Mutallu, 
1330-1290 


Khattusil IT, 
1290-1255 


Dudhalia, 
1255-1230 


Arnuanta, 
1230-1200 ? 


Decadence of the 


Hittite empire 














ASSYRIA | 


Shalmaneser I, | 
1290-1260 


Tukulti-Inurta, 
1260-1240 


Decadence of the 
Assyrian dynasty 


| 





BABYLONIA 


Kadashamn- 
Turgu 


Kadashman- 


| Enlil, 1285-1277 


End of the 
Kassite dynasty, 
1185 


346 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


ing possession of the lands and ports. Thus the Pulestiu 
established themselves in the Shephelah and the coastal towns 
—Gaza, Ascalon, etc. This whole region was thereafter called 
Philistia, from which we have made the word Palestine, a 
term which is not strictly accurate till the settlement of the 
Philistines after 1200 before our era (Fig. 45). On the coast 
of Zahi the harbours from Carmel to Dor gave shelter to the 
vessels of the Zekal ; during the succeeding century they were 
masters of this coast. Still farther north the Semites main- 
tained their hold from Arvad to Tyre, and subsequently 
recovered the ports occupied by the Zekal. In the following 
centuries the maritime towns were going to burst forth into 
splendid commercial activity throughout the whole Medi- 
terranean region, and to carry far and wide the renown and 
the industrial products of the Phcenicians of Tyre, Sidon, 
Berytus, Byblos, and Arad. On the ruins of the Egyptian 
power rose the Philistines and the Phcenicians. Their pro- 
gress was all the quicker since the Hittite power no longer 
existed in the hinterland, the Assyrian power was itself under 
a cloud, and the Cretan and Mycenezan fleets were no longer 
mistresses of the waves. The invasions of peoples of the 
North had wrecked the whole military, diplomatic, and 
political edifice so skilfully planned and so laboriously reared 
by Rameses II and Khattusil. Hither Asia now belonged to 
new peoples who had to work out their own destinies. 

The independence Palestine soon won over against Egypt 
is graphically described in a report drawn up towards the end 
of the XXth Dynasty by an Egyptian royal messenger, 
Unamonu, despatched to Byblos in the fifth year of 
Rameses XI (about 1117 B.c.) to collect the wood needed for 
the construction of a barque for Amon. Unamonu, setting 
out from Tanis, touched at Dor, *‘ a city of the Zekal,’’ where 
he was robbed, and then at Tyre and Byblos. Despite his 
official character, he was very badly received. The Prince of 
Byblos refuses to deliver any wood without payment, and 
declares that ‘‘he is not Pharaoh’s servant.’? After the 
delivery of the wood in exchange for an equivalent in mer- 
chandise, the Prince took the Egyptian to see the tomb 
wherein some envoys of Pharaoh Rameses IX were laid to 
rest; they had been detained for seventeen years at Byblos 
and had died in captivity. Unamonu himself stayed many 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE 347 


weary days at Byblos, for the Zekal pirates infested the seas 
with strong squadrons and were holding the merchantmen to 
ransom. Such were the relations between the Pharaohs, the 
Phoenicians, and the Zekal at the end of the twelfth century.’ 

In the direction of Libya the catastrophe had been no 
less far-reaching. In the eleventh year of Rameses III the 
Temhu, the Mashuasha, and the Libyans returned to the 
charge* and carried a furious attack as far as Heliopolis. 
The Peoples of the North do not seem to have been allied 
with them ; apart from Africans, the texts only speak of some 
indeterminate mountaineers (khastiu),*? who were, perhaps, 


~ 1p» Ug 
Ba pa 


: — ND) ra 5 act 
WT * “Qe ‘tr saa 
ah iy = f 
¢ = : ~ Wn! 
: LLP . x aan 
Cy te “Et © 
: : ‘ 
me . 


qY 





Fic. 45.—PHILISTINE PRISONERS. 


only denizens of the desert. Rameses III promptly checked 
the invasion, slew over 2,000 men, and captured the principal 
chiefs, but here, as on the Syrian coast, the success was only 
temporary and nominal. While the desert between Gaza and 
Raphia had been a sufficient barrier to exclude the Philistines 
from fertile Egypt, the immediate contact between Libya 
and the valley favoured the immigration of the barbarians. 
Rameses III only purchased peace at the price of tolerating 
a veritable pacific occupation of the borders of the Delta by 
Libyans and Shardana.* Rameses III reckons such bar- 
barians among the elements of Egypt’s population; they are 
** countless ’’ and live either as soldiers in the fortresses’ or 
1 Maspero, Contes, 217 ff.; cf. XXVIII, 225, and XIX, 390. 


2 XVII, IV, §§ 86 #. 3 [bid., § 106. 
« XX, II, 765 #.; XIX, 438. 5 XVII, IV, $§ 402-403. 


348 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


as settlers in the rural and urban districts. ‘‘ The Shardana 
and the Kehek (a Libyan tribe) are in the towns on holiday, 
lying on their backs; they are no longer afraid, having no 
enemy coming either from Kush or from Syria; their bows 
and their weapons are deposited in the arsenals, for they are 
contented and intoxicated with joy. Their wives are with 
them, and their children abide at their sides.’’!- In fact, 
these mercenaries made themselves at home in the Delta; 
they will give proof of that on a day that is approaching, 
when these members of Pharaoh’s bodyguard will lay hands 





Fic. 46.—ASSYRIAN INFANTRY AND CHARIOTS IN MOUNTAINOUS COUNTRY ON 
THE COASTS. 


on the palace and give the crown of Lower Egypt to one of 
their own number, Sheshong I (942 B.c.). 

About the same time a period of relative quiet came to 
Hither Asia after the disturbances of the Peoples of the 
North and of the Sea. Tiglath-Pileser I was reorganizing 
the military forces of Assyria. Conquering the degenerate 
Hittites, he seized in Carchemish the keystone of the vault 
of the Fertile Crescent, crossed Lebanon, and reached the 
Mediterranean at Arvad (Fig. 46). Like Sargon and Hammu- 
rabi in the distant past, he esteemed it a point of honour to 
embark upon the sea to take possession thereof, and he 
carved a stele in his name on the rocks of the Nahr-el-Kelb 


1 Jc. § 410, 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE 349 


beside that of Rameses II.' The King of Assyria was, in 
fact, the heir to the Egyptian power. Pharaoh himself 
seemed to admit that, for he sent him as presents a crocodile 
and a hippopotamus, which were led as exotic trophies in 
the triumphal procession of Tiglath-Pileser on his return to 
Nineveh. 

Once, after the battle of Kadesh, it had been Thothmes III 
who received presents from Assyria; now, at the beginning 
of the eleventh century, everything is reversed; the historic 
role of leader of peoples passes to other princes. 

For a few centuries the Semites won back from the Egyp- 
tians and the Indo-European barbarians the supremacy in 
the Ancient East. 


V 
FRoM THE PEOPLES OF THE SEA TO THE PERSIANS 


The commotion caused by the Peoples of the Sea and of 
the North lasted nearly five centuries. For details of the 
events of the period we refer the reader to the volumes in 
the History of Civilization dealing with the Assyrians, the 
Jews, and the Persians. Here we shall merely sketch 
the evolution of the kingdoms and the empires down to the 
moment when the Persians established their dominion from 
Iran to Egypt. 

The raid of Tiglath-Pileser I upon the coasts of the 
Mediterranean was not repeated. For three centuries Assyria 
remained paralysed by dynastic quarrels, revolts, and the 
hostility of her old rival, Babylon; on the other hand, she 
was exposed to the threat of Aryan peoples on the east. 
Egypt was still weaker, the end of her national unity was 
come, two realms divided her between them. ‘That of the 
North was in the hands of the Libyan mercenaries. The 
Pharaohs’ true lineage had taken refuge at Thebes in the 
South and then in Upper Nubia. An auspicious moment 
had therefore arrived for the smaller nations of the Fertile 
Crescent; in their turn they came forth into the world of 
political life and won their independence. 

In North Syria (what had been Upper Lotanu) emerge 
two groups sprung from Semitic populations long established 


1 XIX, 394; XX, II, 656 (vignette). 


350 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


in the land—on the coast the Phoenicians,' in the hinterland 
behind Lebanon and Hermon the Arameans, offspring of the 
Nomads of the Syrian Desert. The flood of Peoples of the 
Sea of the North had left some AXgean elements among them, 
but the bulk of the population was composed of those same 
Semites who had utilized the peace of Egypt and the Egypto- 
Hittite entente to enrich themselves by agriculture and inter- 
national trade. Through contact with the Egyptians they 
had also been concentrated in towns and had been initiated 
into city government and diplomatic relations. What they 
had learnt from their masters increased tenfold their aptitude 
for business and politics.2, Egypt’s former naval bases 
became their commercial ports—Tyre, Sidon, Byblos, and 
Arad. Upon the sea, free since the decay of the Egyptian 
fleet, the Phoenician ships darted hither and thither and 
transported colonists and merchants to lands where the 
Acheans had not yet arrived—to Spain (Gades, Tartessus), 
to Africa (Utica and Carthage), and even beyond the Pillars 
of Hercules. Wherever the Peoples of the Sea, repulsed from 
Syria and Egypt, had been stranded from Sicily to Italy, the 
Semitic merchants followed them or had even preceded them. 

Henceforth the eastern basin of the Mediterranean is in 
constant communication with the western. The riches of the 
old Orient—cereals, wines, spices, fabrics of silk, wool, and 
linen, precious stones, gold, silver, and copper, coming from 
far China and India in the holds of Phcenician vessels— 
reached the greedy hands of the barbarians. With wealth, 
art and civilization also developed luxuriantly and radiated 
to the most distant peoples. By 1000 B.c., through the 
simplification of the linear hieroglyphies, the Phoenicians 
had created an alphabetic writing, a swift vehicle for thought 
and a marvellous instrument for commercial intercourse. 

1M. C. Autran has tried to prove that the Phoenicians were not Semites 
but A’ geans (“‘ Phoenicians ” in II, Mémotres, 1920): This thesis, despite the 
ingenuity of the argument and the wealth of its documentation, has not won 
general acceptance. 

* One of the petty kings of Zekal who received the Egyptian messenger, 
Unamonu, so roughly (supra, p. 346) confesses that Egypt had been Syria’s 
instructor. The author of the story puts these words in his mouth: ‘‘ Amon 
extends his power over all lands. ... But he possessed Egypt in the first 
place. It is thence that civilization and instruction have gone forth to 


reach even this spot where I am. . .” (IV, vol. XXI, p. 87; cf. Maspero, 
Contes, p. 2:24). 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE § 351 


In the hinterland along and beyond the ranges of Lebanon 
the Arameans had become the dominant people. On the 
shores of the great sea of sands, ploughed by convoys, 
Damascus, Kadesh, and Hamath, ports of another Phoenicia 
of the desert, received caravans as Tyre and Sidon gave 
shelter to ships. The valleys, once the battlefields of 
Amorites, Hittites, and Egyptians, became Edens through 
commerce and agriculture. Three States were founded— 
Hamath, Zoba (on the Upper Orontes), and Damascus ; their 
strength may be judged from the fact that for three centuries 
they kept the Assyrians at bay. Masters of the land trade 
routes between Eastern Asia, Europe, and Africa as the 
Phcenicians were commanders of the seaways, the Arameans 
forced themselves on the Orient as mercantile intermediaries. 
They had adopted a practical script derived from the Phe- 
nician. This Aramaic alphabet, propagated by commerce, 
will also conquer the whole East and will gradually replace 
hieroglyphic and cuneiform signs. From the eleventh to the 
seventh centuries B.c., Phoenicians and Arameans, taking 
advantage of the eclipse of Egypt and Assyria, proceeded 
to arrogate to themselves commercial supremacy and the 
hegemony in a veritable Empire, but an economic Empire, 
in the Eastern Mediterranean. 

In the south of Syria (formerly Upper Lotanu) the division 
between coast and hinterland made itself felt equally. The 
coast was in the hands of the Philistines and the Zekal, that 
fraction of the Peoples of the Sea and of the North which 
Rameses III, being unable to exterminate, had installed 
on the approaches to Egypt as a vanguard of mercenaries 
between Raphia and Joppa (Philistines) and round Carmel 
(Zekal). While the Zekal only aspired to a life of piracy, the 
Philistines attempted to establish themselves permanently in 
five cities—Gaza and Ascalon on the shore, Gath, Ashdod, and 
Ekron inland from the coast. These Augean peoples were not 
slow to come into conflict with the Hebrews (Khabiri). The 
latter had been slowly filtering into the Shephelah since the 
time of the Egyptian Empire (supra, p. 307); under Mer- 
neptah, after the Exodus, they already formed a people— 
** Israel ”’ (supra, p. 840). 

Installed by tribes on either bank of the Jordan, they 
imposed their sway on the surrounding mixture of 


852 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


Canaanites, Amorites, and Hittites, especially after the 
victory of Taanach about 1200 B.c. Brought in contact with 
the Philistines, they were embroiled in chronic hostilities, 
with varying fortune. About 1100 B.c. the Philistines pushed 
their way to the banks of the Jordan, captured the arch, and 
reduced the Hebrews to servitude. This defeat revealed to 
the vanquished the need of uniting their divided tribes, and 
Saul founded the kingdom about 1000 s.c. Though Saul fell 
in combat with the Philistines, David at least delivered 
Israel, was anointed sole king, and made Jerusalem, the 
Canaanites’ last fortress, his own capital. All Palestine was 
for a while subject to Jerusalem; the Aramean States did 
homage, the Phoenicians made an alliance with David and 
Solomon. About 970 the latter was a great sovereign, who 
dominated the western horn of the Fertile Crescent from the 
Euphrates to the Isthmus. The King of Egypt gave him his 
daughter in marriage, the Phoenicians’ ships and the Ara- 
meeans’ caravans brought him the tribute of the Euphrates, 
of Arabia, and of India. It looked as if a new Semitic empire 
was to be founded in Syria, North and South being reunited. 


The counter-attack of the great powers was looming on 
the horizon. If Egypt, divided, was incapable of reconsti- 
tuting the empire, Sheshong I nevertheless took Jerusalem 
by storm (about 925) and contributed to the downfall of 
Israel’s hegemony. In the middle of the eighth century a 
still more terrible danger was threatening from the north- 
east; the kings of Nineveh recovered the land between the 
Euphrates and the Orontes which commands the routes 
through the Fertile Crescent. Then the ports of Pheenicia 
fell into their hands. Despite a long and desperate resistance, 
Damascus became the prey of Tiglath-Pileser III (782). The 
Assyrians possessed the military forces and the administra- 
tive science which alone can give an empire; the Hebrews, 
on the contrary, were weakened by the schism (after 9380 
B.c.) between the kingdoms of Israel (Samaria) and of 
Judah (Jerusalem). When Damascus no longer covered 
the approach to the Jordan, Samaria succumbed (722). 
Jerusalem escaped Sennacherib, who failed likewise in an 
ill-prepared attack on the Delta, but Esarhaddon conquered 
Egypt in 671 B.c., and Ashurbanipal sacked Thebes in 668. 


THE EGYPTO-HITTITE ENTENTE 358 


The whole Orient from Chaldea to Elephantine was occupied 
by the Assyrians. 

This empire was founded upon force and terror; the 
massacre of prisoners, the destruction of cities taken by 
storm, the wholesale deportation of populations, were its 
methods of domination.! 

Only after orgies of brutal force was the administration 
of the conquered countries organized upon the sage methods 
of the Babylonians. The Oriental world had only accepted 
with horror the force of Assyria, which formed such a brutal 
successor to the *‘ peace of Egypt.”’ 

The Pharaohs were the first to free themselves from the 





Fic. 47.—How THE ASSYRIANS TREATED THE CONQUERED. 


yoke (about 650). Then the tide of invasions or migrations 
of peoples, which had been suspended for a moment, flowed 
on, eroding from the north to the east the frontiers of the 
Assyrian Empire. Some Semitic nomads, the Chaldeans, 
occupied Babylonia, which was thenceforth called Chaldza. 
In concert with the Scyths from the North and the Aryans 
of Iran (Medes and Persians), they assailed the detested 
Assyrians. Nineveh fell in 606 B.c., and was razed from the 
surface of the earth amidst the joyous shouts of the liberated 
captives (Nah. iii, 19). 


For three-quarters of a century (606 to 539 B.c.) the 
Chaldeans took the place of the Assyrians; Babylon, after 
the lapse of more than a thousand years, became again the 
capital of the Semitic world. But this empire lacked both 


* On this, see Delaporte, Mesopotamia, Part II. 
23 


854 FIRST EMPIRES OF THE EAST 


adequate strength and moral unity. Its greatest sovereign, 
Nebuchadrezzar II, could destroy Jerusalem in revolt (596) 
and carry the population off captive to Babylon on the 
Assyrian plan; neither he nor his successors imposed their 
sway upon the disparate States of the East. Medes and 
Persians were already occupying the plain of Assyria. When 
Cyrus had wrested from the grasp of Croesus, King of Lydia, 
the keystone of the vault of the Fertile Crescent (546), he 
became the master of the destinies of the Orient; Babylon 
fell in 589 B.c., Cambyses occupied Egypt in 525. 


Once more the Semites were checked by the Indo-Euro- 
peans. To the latter fell the historic mission of giving the 
Oriental world the unity and peace which it had not known 
since the destruction of the Egyptian Empire. In that task 
Darius and his successors, Alexander and the Cesars, were 
successful as long as they had the strength to repel from 
their frontiers the eternal aggressors against the civilized 
Orient—those nomadic and migrant peoples who reappear 
under the names of Scyths, Parthians, and Arabs. 


CONCLUSION 


THE aim of this study was to describe the oldest human 
institutions. We have found them in the Ancient East. 

Far back though the monuments of Egypt and Chaldea 
may take us, they are neither old enough nor sufficiently 
continuous to allow us to retrace the history of mankind’s 
first institutions from its beginnings and without any serious 
gap.* 

We have had to make use of the comparative method. 
We have sought in the field of ethnography to see whether 
social organisms exist, still more primitive, the origins of 
which might be more or less known and which might lead 
the observer up to the point at which we find the oldest 
inhabitants of Egypt and Chaldea. 

In Egypt the first historical monuments, anterior to 
4000 B.c., reveal a society organized in clans; the latter 
still possess some of the characters of totemic clans, but 
they are already dispersed over territorial divisions. Some 
centuries later, about 3300 s.c., Menes founds the centralized 
monarchy and establishes the divine right of kings. In 
Chaldza before the year 3000 the land appears divided into 
** cities of royalty ’’; it was then acquainted with centralized 
monarchy and territorial groupings. Such a political and 
social condition is certainly not “‘ primitive.’’ How shall we 
imagine it in a stage, if not primordial—we shall never reach 
that—at least earlier? To answer that question according 
to the present state of ethnographical research has been the 
aim of the first part of this book. 

Among the uncivilized peoples which serve as term of com- 
parison the first social organization is not the family, but the 
clan; all the clansmen believe themselves related, not by 
blood, but as the result of a mystic communion of all with 
one totem. In the latter resides the source of a sacred power, 
of a universal authority, which the Melanesians call mana. 


? We postpone to our book on the Nile a discussion of the desiderata at 
the moment suggested by the study of Egypt as well as of the principal 
lacune in the historical documentation; as far as the other States of the 
Ancient East are concerned, consult the volumes in this series devoted to 
the several States. 

355 


356 CONCLUSION 


But this authority is diffused among all the clansmen, this 
régime is equalitarian and communistic. The clan chooses 
for itself a name and an emblem; it cannot take the name of 
a chief, since as yet no ‘‘ chief’’ exists, nor the name of a 
locality, since life is still nomadic. 

Subsequently the clans settle down in stable villages and 
form territorial groupings: it is at this moment that power 
begins to become individualized. The mana is concentrated 
in a council of elders, those whom age, experience, wealth, 
and magic knowledge single out. Groups of clans with 
federal councils may exist. Still later, by a parallel evolu- 
tion, the mana comes to animate to a more special degree a 
fetish, who becomes the god of the clan or of groups of clans, 
and sovereignty, undivided among the elders, is concentrated 
in the person of a chief who monopolizes the mana and 
emblems of the totems. How does this absorption of the 
totems by a man come about? It is through the interplay 
of multiple factors and also of rites, of which the potlatch 
societies offer very instructive examples. Within the 
developed clan ‘‘ confraternities ’’ are formed, in which a 
social hierarchy is manifest for the first time within the clan. 
A man who is strong, rich, expert in magic, can by largesses, 
in which all the clansmen participate, purchase successive 
grades of initiation, which raise him by degrees till he in- 
carnate the totem or god of his clan. Such chiefs may exist 
in greater or less number: the system is then of the feudal 
type, or culminates in an assemblage of federal kingships. 
The term of this evolution is kingship concentrated in a 
single individual and recognized throughout a whole country. 
In this case the king absorbs the gods of the entire country 
and inherits their magic power and their wealth, but is held 
responsible for life and nouns tags by the men who have 
become his subjects. 

Are all the features of this sy, nee social organization 
to be found actually or as survivals in Egypt or Chaldeea ? 
It would be vain and far from scientific to expect it. The 
comparative method does not imply an artificial parallelism 
between the primitive inhabitants of the Ancient East and 
the uncivilized peoples of modern times. And so in the 
second part of this book we have contented ourselves with 
presenting objectively the historical facts parallel to the 
ethnographic facts without forcing the comparison. The 


CONCLUSION 357 


exposition given by M. Davy confirms an interpretation 
propounded by us twenty years ago as to the “ religious 
character of Pharaonic kingship,’’? according to which the 
Pharaoh believes himself an incarnate god upon earth, heir 
of the gods, and professes himself responsible for the life and 
nourishment of his subjects. How are we to imagine the 
evolution of the clans in Egypt and the birth of centralized 
power? That will be better understood in the light of the 
facts revealed by ethnography. Without forgetting that we 
are here in the domain of hypothesis, we must know how, 
when occasion demands it, to use hypothesis supported by 
well-attested facts to bring together the membra disjecta of 
protohistoric monuments. 


The god-king has developed the Egyptian kingdom; we 
shall describe that in our work on the Nile. The scope of the 
present volume is restricted to an account of the relations 
between peoples which have led from kingdoms to empires. 

These increments of power are, indeed, caused sometimes 
by the individual ambition of the sovereigns. Most often the 
latter do but obey geographical and economic necessities. 
Egypt and Mesopotamia are two oases very similar in nature 
at the two extremities of a ‘‘ crescent ’’ of routes and valleys; 
both surrounded by desert and mountainous regious infi- 
nitely less fertile and populated by nomads always in quest 
of food, the two valleys have been perpetually exposed to 
raids or migrations. For the Pharaohs, as for the Patesis, it 
was a vital necessity to pursue the pillagers to their haunts 
in Nubia, Syria, or Elam; thus Greater Egypt and Greater 
Mesopotamia were begotten. 

Chaldea and Egypt are rich in cereals, but possess no 
minerals. To the one the copper mines of Sinai and the gold 
mines of Nubia, to the other the deposits of Elam, Anatolia, 
and the Taurus, seemed indispensable to the economic life of 
the community. Hence the expeditions of conquest which 
attracted the Pharaohs to Sinai from the Ist Dynasty and 
the Babylonians to Anatolia from the third millennium. 
Caravans and ships united the ‘‘ king’s mines’? to Memphis 
and Babylon. The kings alone could meet such expenses of 
exploitation and transportation, and so the mines and long- 
distance trade were at first and for many centuries State 
monopolies. And so economic policy evolved; it led the 


358 CONCLUSION 


Patesis and the Pharaohs to seek access to the sea in diverse 
directions and also to that sea of sands, the centre of the 
Fertile Crescent. The corridor of Syria-Palestine and the 
junctions of routes between the Euphrates and the Taurus 
were henceforth much-coveted territories. 

For 8,000 years Semites, Egyptians, and Aryans con- 
fronted one another in Syria and strove for the possession of 
its ports and trade routes. 

Now, a policy of military and commercial expansion only 
succeeds in the hands of those who have prepared the means 
thereto—trained soldiers and well-equipped ships, reserves of 
gold and materials for payments and exchanges, adminis- 
trators to exploit the conquered territory. A Hammurabi, 
an Amenophis, a Solomon created the appropriate institu- 
tions; they raised their national militias and their foreign 
mercenaries, they promulgated laws on commercial relations, 
and educated administrators and diplomats. Egypt in par- 
ticular about the fifteenth century was perfectly equipped 
for a policy of wide sweep. 

Before the Egyptians the Semites had tried to create an 
empire. Sargon the Elder and Hammurabi had in turn 
dominated the Asiatic East; every time the overflowing tide 
of nomads or peoples in migration (Gutium, Hittites) had 
swept away their cunning political edifices and overwhelmed 
Babylon. Then in successive waves rolled on the eagre of 
the Kassites and the Hyksés; it overflowed even upon Egypt, 
spreading from Shinar to Thebes, and left the empire in the 
hands of barbarians, astonished at their own success, but 
ignorant and incapable of any organization. 

This was the moment for the Egyptians to try their 
fortune in Asia. To put themselves beyond the reach of 
another invasion they had to occupy the whole corridor 
of the Orontes and the Jordan as well as the battlefield 
of Naharina between the Orontes and the Euphrates. 
Thothmes III purchased this success at the cost of twenty 
wars. After destroying the barbarians’ empire, he had to 
reconstruct another; that he accomplished despite the tur- 
bulence of the Syrians, the rivalry of Mitanni, the greed of 
the Nomads, the jealousy of Babylon, and the arrogance of 
the Hittites. The excellent administration of Egypt suc- 
ceeded in creating that type of suzerainty which we had 


CONCLUSION 359 


thought quite a modern invention—the protectorate; few 
Egyptian troops or officials maintained her sway, but the 
local resources in men and materials were employed in such 
a way as to make the indigenous elements neutralize one 
another. Egypt made herself loved and was able to maintain 
peace in all Asia, not so much by force of arms as by resource 
and diplomacy. We had long believed that diplomacy was 
an invention of the astute politicians of the Renaissance; 
that illusion is dispelled when we glance through the des- 
patches interchanged between the Pharaohs and the kings of 
Babylon, Assyria, Mitanni, and Khatti. Treaties of offensive 
and defensive alliance, commercial conventions, political 
marriages; such are the State papers from the archives of 
Tell-el-Amarna and Boghaz-Keui, which yield up to us the 
secrets of the concert of nations in the fifteenth and four- 
teenth centuries before our era. When the migrations of 
peoples in Anatolia drove the Hittites southwards and shook 
the foundations of the Egyptian Empire, we have seen with 
what political common sense Egypt replaced the alliance with 
Mitanni by the Hittite alliance, and how Rameses II and 
Khattusil were able to establish an Egypto-Hittite entente 
against Assyria and the Peoples of the North. But a new 
cyclone bursts upon the coasts of the Eastern Mediterranean : 
the Peoples of the Sea ravaged the Syrian provinces and put 
an end to the Egyptian Empire. The Oriental world did not 
enjoy security again; the Assyrians brought it only the 
horrors of war. It is the Indo-Europeans—Persians, Greeks, 
and Romans—who will reap the heritage of the Rameses for 
the world’s peace. 

In appearance there is nothing in common between these 
vast empires, extending from Napata to the Indus and 
peopled by millions of men, and the miniature cells wherein 
social life began in Egypt and Shinar. Nevertheless, the 
same mystic conception that animated the clan still gave 
spiritual life to those colossal human groups. In each of the 
realms of the East the divine dominates everything. 

In Egypt the king is only the living image upon earth 
of the old royal clan’s god, the Falcon Horus. In Shinar 
dynastic gods—Enlil at Nippur, Marduk at Babylon—make 
and unmake the kings. In Assyria the royal tribe, the 
capital, and the realm are confused in the person of the god 


360 CONCLUSION 


Ashur. In Palestine, Israel is at once a god and a people. 
In relations with foreigners the divine element is no less 
dominant: the wars are conflicts of Amon against Baal, of 
Ashur against Enlil, of Israel against Dagan. Conquests and 
victories display the personal exploits of the gods; Amon 
brandishes his sword and plies his bow at Pharaoh’s side in 
the combat. The sign of its defeat to a country comes when 
the victor carries off the idols of the gods of the conquered 
in captivity. No treaty is valid if the great gods of the 
contracting parties do not approve it, sign it, guarantee it 
as witnesses. 

This necessary intervention of the gods in political and 
international relations might, however, oppose an obstacle 
to the perfect harmony among the peoples of an empire. 
How should the intimate union of men, already differing 
in language, customs, and colour, be achieved without the 
worship of international gods? 

We have seen that the Pharaohs and their rivals in the 
East had solved this problem by the cult of the sovereign 
common to all peoples. By proclaiming themselves gods of 
empire, Sargon and Rameses wished to realize in their own 
persons that mystic or religious unity which once constituted 
the strength of the clan, which still maintained the unity of 
the kingdom, and which could alone form the tie between 
all the peoples of an empire. Alexander the Great, the 
Ptolemies, and the Cesars will, in their turn, impose upon 
their subjects the worship of the sovereign, not so much out 
of vanity as to consolidate moral unity. We have noted that 
under Amenophis IV a more exalted conception, but one too 
far in advance of the times, marks the apogee of the Egyptian 
Empire. Pharaoh proposes to found an international cult in 
honour of the great benefactor of all men without distinction, 
of the animator of life in all countries—the Sun (Aten), whom 
he himself incarnates upon earth. Akhenaten, sovereign of 
diverse peoples, felt that neither the force of arms nor 
economic necessities nor material interests could cement 
together the elements of an empire. The tie must be 
religious. In seeking this tie outside the person of the 
sovereign in a superhuman Providence he was still acting in 
obedience to tradition. And so through its mystic principle 
the Clan has survived in the Empire. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


PART I 


ADAM, “‘ Stammesorganisation und Hauptlingstum der Tlinkit 
Indianer Nordwestamerikas,” Zeitschr. f: cass Rechtswis., 
1913, vol. xxix 


—— A similar study of the Haida, d7d., 1914, vol. XXxv 


—— ‘‘Stammesorganisation und ape der Wakash- 
stamme,”’ zb7d., 1919, vol. xxxv 


Année sociologigue, Paris, Alcan, 12 vols., 1898-1912 
BACHOFEN, Miitterrecht, 1861 


Boas, ‘“‘ The Social Organisation and Secret Societies of the 


Kwakiutl Indians,” Report of the U.S. National Museum, 
1845, Washington, 1896. ; 


BoucLe, Legons de sociologie sur V évolution des valeurs, Paris, 1922 
BRowNn (G.), Melanesians and Polynesians, London, 1910 
CODRINGTON, The Melanesians, Oxford, 1891 ; 
CUNOW, Die cata amie aediai der Australnegern, 
Stuttgart, 1894 . 
—— Die wkonomischen Grundlagen der aa 1897. 8 
Davy, La Fot jurée, Paris, 1922 : : 
DurKHEIM, La Division du travail social, 2nd ed., Paris, 1902 
—— Les régles de la méthode sociologigue, 7th ed., Paris, 1919 


—— Les formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse, 1914 (English 
translation, Elementary Forms of Religious Life, London) 


Dussaup, /ntroduction a histoire des religions, Paris, 1915 . 
Fauconnet, La Responsibilité, Paris, 1920 


FRAZER, Totemism and Exogamy: a Treatise on certain early 
ores of Superstition and Society, 4 vols., London, 1910 


HarTLANnD (Sidney), Primitive Paternity, London, 1909 


—— Primitive Society: the Beginning of the ae and the 
Reckoring of Descent, London, 1921 : 


Howitt, The Native Tribes of South-East Australia, London, 1904 
HuBert and Mauss, Mélanges de V histoire des religions, Paris, 1909 


KEANE, Man, Past and Present. New edition revised by Haddon, 
Cambridge, 1920 


KRAUSE, Die Tlinkit Indianer, Jena, 1885 


LrEvy-BruHL, Les fonctions mentales dans les soctétés inférieures, 
Paris, 1910 ; : 
La Mentalité primitive, Paris, 1922 (English translation, 
Primitive Mentality, London, 1923) 

x 361 





XXIII 


XXIV 


362 BIBLIOGRAPHY 


McLENNAN (John Ferguson), Studies in Ancient Society, com- 
prising a Reprint of Primitive Marriage (1865), an Enquiry 
into the Origin of the Form of sore in Marriage 











Ceremonies, London, 1876 : ; : : XXV 
Lowvik, Primitive Society, New York, 1920 : ; ‘ XXVI 
MAINE (Sumner), Ancient Law, London, 1861 ; : : XXVII 

Notes on the History of Ancient Institutions, London . . XXVIII 
Dissertations on Early Law and Custom, London, 1883  . XXIX 
Man: a Monthly Record of Anthropological Science, ge 3 

the Royal Anthropological Institute, London . XXX 
MarreETT, Zhe Threshold of pasha: 2nd enlarged destson 

London, 1914 ; . ; : : XXXI 

Psychology and Folklore, London, 1920 : : . XXXII 
Mauss, see Hubert and Année sociologique . : : . XXXIII 
Moret, Mystéres égyptiens, Paris, 1918... ; : : XXXIV 
—— Au temps des Pharaons, Paris, 1908 . : ; : XXXV 
—— Rois et dieux d@’Egypte, Paris, 1911 . ‘ : a XXXVI 
MoraGan (Lewis H.), Ancient Society, 1877 . ; : . XXXVII 
PARKINSON, Dreissig Jahre in der Sudsee, Stuttgart, 1907 . . XXXVIII 
Preuss, ‘‘ Der Ursprung der Religion und Kunst,” Glodus, Ixxxvi, 

1904, and Ixxxvii, 1905 . : . ; : XXXIX 
Rivers, The History of Melanesian eae 2 vols., Cambridge, 

1914 ; : ‘ XL 
SCHURTZ, Lie éecebeee a der Kultur, heiptig 100: ; ; XLI 
—— Alterklassen und Mannerbinde, Berlin, 1902 . : ms XLII 
SmiTH (William Robertson), Lectures on the Religion of the Semites, 

new ed., London, 1914 . ¢ ; , : : XLII 
SPENCER and GILLEN, The Native Tribes of Central Australia, 

London, 1899 : ; ‘ : : . : XLIV 
—— —— The Northern Tribes of Central Australia, London, 

1903. : ; , ; ; : : XLV 
SPENCER (Baldwin), Mative Tribes of the Northern Territory of 

Australia, London, 1914 . ; ‘ : ; : XLVI 
SWANTON, Soctal Conditions, Beliefs and Linguistic Relationship 

of the Tlinkit Indians (Bureau of Ethnol. Bull. 26, 1908) . XLVII 





Contributions to the Ethnology of the Haida (vol. v, Part I of 
the Memoirs of the Amer. Mus. of Natural History, Jesup 


North Pacific Exped.), New York, 1905 . ‘ i oo eo LES 
VinoGRADOF, Outlines of Historical Jurisprudence, Oxford, 1920 . XLIX 
WEBSTER, Primitive Secret Socteties, London, 1908 . : : L 


WESTERMARCK, Zhe Origin and i sat! of Moral Ideas, 2 
vols., London, 1912 : ‘ LI 


— The History of Human Marriage, 8 vols., te oe 1921 ' LII 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


PARTS II AND III 


A.—PERIODICALS 


Annales du service des Antiquités de l’Egypte, Cairo 
Mémoires et Bulletin de l'Institut frangais d’archéologie orientale, 
Cairo , 


Comptes rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 
Paris . 


Recueil de travaux relatifs 4 la philologie et a fet aeiagia égyp- 
tiennes et assyriennes, Paris : ‘ ‘ h 


Revue archéologique, Paris 

Revue assyriologique, Paris 

Revue critique, Paris 

Revue égyptologique, Paris ‘ : : 
Revue de Vhistoire des religions (Annales du Musée Guimet), Paris 
Sphinx, Uppsala and Paris 

Syria, Paris ; : 
Zeitschrift ftir ke Bile te und Altertumskunde, Leipzig . 
The Journal of Egyptian Archeology, London : 
Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archeology, London . 
Egyptus, Milan . 


B.—GENERAL WORKS 


James H. BreastepD, A History of Egypt, London, 1906 

—— Ancient Records of Egypt, Chicago, 1906, 5 vols. 

R. Dussaup, Les civilisations préhelléniques dans le bassin de la 
oiiterranie. 2nd ed., Paris, 1914 

H. R. Har, The Ancient an nae of the Near East, renaees 1913 

G. MaspPERO, Histoire ancienne des peuples de Orient oaiben 
Paris, 1895-1897, 3 vols. ; 

Epuarp MEYER, Geschichte des Altertums, 2te Aufl., ties ae 
Berlin, 1909, Erster Band, 2 vols. : : : 

—— Histoire de Pantiquité (French translation of the 8rd edition 
by A. Moret, vol. ii), Paris 1913 . 

—— Chronologie égyptienne (French translation ft A. Moret), 
Paris, 1912, 1 vol. (Annales du Musée Guimet, Bibliothéque 
d’études, vol. xxiv, fasc. 2) ‘ : : . 

Sir W. M. FLINDERS PETRIE, A ee ae of aie (vols. i-ili), 3rd 
ed., London, 1899, 6 vols. : : 2 


363 


XVI 
XVII 


XVIII 
XIX 


XX 
XXI 


XXII 


XXIill 


XXIV 


364 BIBLIOGRAPHY 


C.—SPECIAL WORKS 


JaMES H. BREASTED, The Origins of Civilization Si ee from 
the Sctentzfic Monthly) 


Jean Cappart, Les débuts de Part en eve ate Brussels, 1909 


ALEXANDRE MORET, Au temps des Pharaons, 3rd ed., Paris, 1922. 





Rois et Dieux d’Egypte, 3rd ed., Paris, 1922 . : : 
— Mystéres égyptiens, 3rd ed., Paris, 1922 


— Du caractére religieux de la A as aera tee Paris, 
1903 . 


J. DE Morcan, Prehistoric Man, Tenaen. 1924 
—— Recherches sur les origines de TEgypte, Paris, 1896-7, 2 vols. 
Cray, The Empire of the Amorites, New Haven, 1919 


P, S. P. Hanpcock, The Latest ae on Bible mkt may 
1918 . ‘ 


W. L. Kine, A History of Sumer and Akkad, eee 1910 
EpUARD MEYER, Reich und Kultur der Chetiter, Berlin, 1914 


XXV 
XXVI 
AXVII 
XXVIII 
XXIX 


XXX 
XXXI 
XXXII 
XXXIII 


XXXIV 
XXXV 
XXXVI 


INDEX 


Aaxw (Egyptian moon-god), 259 

Abraham, 219, 240, 251 

Abydos, 120, 187, 152, 155, 171, 
209, 233, 934, 308 

Achzans, 310, 331, 338 ; 
tian texts, 338 

Adam, 93 

Aigean peoples: relations of Egypt 
with, 177, 233, 267, 279, 307, 
310; ’ dispersion “of, 336, 350 

Agade, 203, 207 

Age and power 
societies, 65, 69 

Age groups, theory of, 23 

Agriculture : discovery and diffu- 
sion of, 120, 125, 164, 166, 198 
200, 209 ; influence on social 
organization, 112; kings and, 
107, 147; women and, 106 

Ahmes i 958-260, 266 

Akhenaten. See ’ Amenophis IV 

Akkad, 203, 205 

Alasya, 280, 292-3 

Alatunja, 65, 68-9 

Aleppo, 963, 276, 307, 312, 321 

Alliances: E gypt and Mitanni, 
290 ; Teal Hittite, 327; Hit- 
tites and Babylonians, 324 

Alphabet, invention of, 201, 358 

Altjira, 29, 78 

234, 246 


in Egyp- 


in primitive 


Amenemhat, 221, 228, 

Amenophis a 260, 266; III, 280, 
286-295, 303, 305, 334; IV, 280, 
286-292, 297-300, 305, 307 

American Indians, customs of, 29, 
32, 46, 59, 68, 81, 90, 97, "106. 
Seo also Haida, K wakiutl, Tlin- 
it 

Amorites, 193-4, 197, 212, 240, 251, 
261, 305, 351; racial type of, 
192; in Mesopotamia, 215 

Amu (Asiatics), 169, 176, 218, 227, 
229, 245, 249 

Ancestor worship, 44 

Ancestors and gods, 77, 80 

Animals, sacred, 7, 46, 128, 130, 
140; punishment of, 150 

Anzanite language, 199 

Arabia, climate and geography of, 
187-8. See also Yemen 

Arameans, 1938-4, 325, 351 

Aristocracies, ancient, 58 

Armament: of Asiatics, 191-2, 231, 
274; of Hittites, 238, 304; of bar- 
barians, 251, 313, 338, 341 

Armenians, 192, 238 











Art: Agean, 177, 234, 288; cave, 
116, 118; Egyptian, 137, 210, 
295 ; Mesopotamian, 155, 210, 
288 : Syrian, 283, 350 

Arunta (Australian tribe), 18, 20, 
27-8, 65, 70 

Aryans, 87, 234, 240, 264, 275, 
282, 336, 349, 353 

Ascalon, 262, 324, 339 

Ashur (god), 197 

Ashurbanipal, 352 

Asiatic invasion of Egypt, theory 
of, 122, 155, 164 

Asiatics, early portraits of, 183, 
191 

Assemblies, tribal, 64, 67, 77 

Assur, 215 

Assyrians, 160, 1938, 197, 264, 324 
348, 349; and Hyksds, 248; and 
New Kingdom, 277, 289 ; in Cap- 
padocia, 242; westward advance 
of, 335, 351- g 

Asylum among Australian natives, 
66 


Aten. See Solar disc 

Atreus, 37 

Australian aborigines, customs of, 
10, 18, 24, 29, 32, 46, 56, 64, 71 

Authority originally diffuse, 51, 
65, 71, 78, 143, 356 

Avaris, 247 ihe 252, 259, 310 

Aziru, 305 


Baal, 253, 256, 296 

Babylon: foundation of, 192, 205, 
212, 216, 217; sacked by Hittites, 
236, 239 ; relations of : with New 
Kingdom, 277, 280-1, 287-9; with 
Hittites, 324, "331; with Assyria, 
331, 349 : revival of, 353 

Bantu, 112 

Barbarian empire, 253-4 

Barbarian invasions and raids on 
Egypt, 123, 170, 177, 214, 218, 
248, 251, $37- 342 ; on Mesopo- 
tamia, 205, 212, 234, 353 

Barley. See Grains cultivated 

Barter, 170, 179, 198 

Battles. See Kadesh, Megiddo 

Beduins, 169, 191, 193, 209, 250, 
260, 295 

Beni-Hassan, 
248 

Blood-brotherhood among Semites, 


197 
Blood-feud, 13, 50, 130, 197 


paintings at, 245, 


365 


366 


Blood, sanctity of, 17, 45, 51 

Blue-eyed people on Egyptian 
monuments, 167, 192, 338 

Boas, 29, 33, 59, 88, 96, 100, 105 

Boghaz- Keui, 281, 294, 303, 305, 
311, 326 

Brick architecture in Egypt and 
Mesopotamia, 155, 200, 210 

Brother-and-sister mar riage, 144 

Brown, G., 102 

Bull- -roarers, 45 

Burial rites, 120. 
mids 

Buto, 131, 135, 140 

Byblos, 177, 181, 209, 233, 305, 
310, 811, 329, 346 ; ships of, 1e7 
228, 262, 977, 294” 





See also Pyra- 


Calendar, invention of, 133; Baby- 
lonian, "210 


Canaanites, 190, 209, 214, 250, 261, | 


262, 287, 352 
Candolle, ‘161 
Cannibal spirits, 101 
Cannibalism, significance of, 106 
Cappadocia, 236, 242. See also 

under Hittites 
Caravan traffic, 165, 170, 173, 179, 

198, 351 
Carchemish, 266, 276, 283, 307, 348 
Carmel, Mount, 214, 262, 270, "346 
Carnarvon, Lord, 258 
Chalcolithic remains, 119, 199 
Chaldea. See Mesopotamia 
Chaldeans, 194, 353 
Challenge, ‘principle of, 86, 93, 96 
Chiefs: in primitive societies, 64, 

85, 90, 94; in Ancient East, 130 
Chronology : ’ Beyptian, 127-8, O47 : 

Mesopotamian, 202-3 
Churingas 19, 45, 66, 78. See also 

Bull-roarers 
Cilicia, 233, 239, 270, 279, 292 
Song formation of, 198, 203, 209, 

6 
Civilization: Egyptian, 120, 122, 

123-5, 129, 133, 155, 163-4, 222 ; 

Mesopotamian, 201, 208, 939 : 

Palestinian, 209, 262 ; Syrian, 

209, 230, 262, 351 

4 TOON BaD = 


racial type of, 192, 


Clan: Egyptian, 
totemic, 20 ff., 50, 143; vague- 
ness of, 25 

Clan chief, 94 

Classes, matrimonial, 32 ff. 

Clay, Albert, 195 

Climate: Mediterranean, 116; 
Hither Asia, 188, 200 

Coalitions, ancient, 311 

Coats-of-Arms. See Crests 

Codrington, 47 

een uate! of phratries, 21, 80, 
9 

Collective responsibility of clan, 14 


of 





INDEX 


Commerce. See Caravan traffic, 
Exports, Imports, Maritime 
trade, Trade 

Communism, primitive, 5, 14, 71, 
111, 144 

Conception, primitive notions of, 


Conceptional totemism, 28, 43, 70 
Confraternities, &6, 99 ‘ff. ; "356 
Consanguinity contrasted 
totemic kinship, q.v. 
Contract, primitive ideas of, 86, 92 
Cradle of Semites. See Semites 
Creation, the, 202 
Crenellated walls, 155 


to 


Crests, 33, 61, 87, 90 
Crete, "177, 233, 253, 262, 277, 279, 
293. 310 


Crown of Egypt, form of, 131-2, 
136 

Cult of the king in conquered 
lands, 180, 181, 261, 296, 344 

Cuneiform script: origin, 201; use 
of, 237, 280-1 

Ciinow, 92. 40 

Custom, supr emacy of in primitive 
societies, 67, 72 

Cylinder seals, 155, 210 

Cyprus, 163, 171, 207, 278, 293 


Damascus: oasis of, 193, 198, 215, 
230; State of, 351 

Damietta skull, 119 

Danezans, 290, 311, 341 

Dardanians, 311 

David, King, 352 

Dawson, 87 

Dead Sea, 188 

Death of Pharaoh, 
sequences of, 152 

Deification of ‘king, intention of, 
211, 296 

Deity, idea of, 75-6 

Delaporte, L., 202, 235, 241, 287, 
303, 335, 355 

Democracies, ancient, 58, 63 

Desiccation, ‘effects of, 118, 200 

Despotism, ‘collective, 111 

Dieri (Australian tribe) 12 

Diplomacy: Egyptian, 286-292; 
Hittite, 311, 324 

Diplomatic language, 281, 286, 295 

Divine dynasties, 128 

Divinity of Pharaoh, 134, 143, 153, 
296 

Domestic animals, origin of, 162, 
164 

Domestication of animals, 120, 196 

Dress of peoples depicted on monu- 
ments, 155, 168, 179, 192, 238, 
294, 313, 338, 342 

Durkheim, 12, 14, 18, 20, 22, 23, 
28, 39, 40, 45, 49, 56, 61, 75, 80, 
83, 111 


supposed con- 


INDEX 


Dwarfs, 180 
Dynastic race, theory of, 155 


Eanatum, 206 

Economic : factor in personal power, 
105, 109, 142; bases of ancient 
imperialism, 174, 176, 182, 186, 
194, 206, 222, 234, 240, 266 

Edom, 197 

Edomites, B51 

Education of princes by Egypt, 
282, 293, 297 

El-Amarna (Tell) letters, 207, 240 
280-293, 305, 334 

Elamites, 171, 196, 199, 202, 206, 
215, 243 

ee councils of, 73, 124, 1380, 


Elliot Smith, 158 
Empire, gods of, 212, 296, 300 
Emptor familie, 89 
Endogamy, 19, 21, 28, 144 
England and the English, 58 
Engwara ceremony, 69 


mine predynastic, 123, 128, 

Eoliths, 117 

Eridu, 200 

Ktruscans, 338-9 

Evans, Sir Arthur, 253 

European races, 116, 338 

Exodus, the, 340 

Exogamy, 13, 18 ff., 40 

Exploration, Egyptians’ voyages 
of, 225-6 

Exports: Egyptian, 170, 179, 222, 


266, 288; Babylonian, 225, 288; 
Syrian, 181, 228, 233, 266, 283, 
350 ; Hittite, 331; Beean, 171, 
933, 294. 
Extradition, 
treaty, 338 


provisions for in 


Falcon, Pharaoh’s protector, 7, 
130, 134, 140, 142 

Family, primitive, 13 ff., 55, 196 

Fauna, Egyptian native, 161 

Federations, primitive, 83 

Fetishes, Egyptian, 123, 128 

Fetishism contrasted to totemism, 
4 


Feudalism, 99, 110, 231 

Finances, 239, 266 

Fison, 22 

Flood, the, 202 

Flood : Nile, 119, 124, 182; 
Euphrates, 188, 203 

Food, provision of by chief, 105, 
142, 147; sanctity of, 106 


Tigris- 


Foreign Office, Egyptian, 280, 
305 
Foreign policy: Egyptian, 172, 


179, 184, 234, 280, 294; Baby- 
lonian, 218 











367 


Frazer, Sir James, 14, 16, 18, 26, 
28, 36, 45, 49, 61, 64, 81, 87, 94, 
107, 124, 132, 147, 149, 151 


Frontiers, defence of ‘Egyptian, 
177-281, 305 

Gad, 197 

Gafsa, 117 


Gentile organization, 62 

Geographical background of his- 
boEy 115-6, 160, 187, 203, 236, 
62 

Gerontocracy, 69, 124, 144 

Gezer, 208, 258, 339 

God: rise of idea of, 79, 133; rela- 
ee to the society, 49 ; to ‘chief, 


Gods as signatories to treaties, 
205, 296, 312, 328, 331 
Ee "Bey ptian riches in, 179, 261, 


Gr ae cultivated, home of, 161, 
64 

Gudea, 215 

Gutium, 203, 205, 212, 215 


Gyneecocracy, 30, 41 


Haddon, A. C., 31, 
Haida (Indian. bribe’ 33, 61, 83, 


87, 93 
193, 216-218, 


Hammurabi, 
234 
Hartland, Sidney, 37-8, 40 
Hau-nebu. See Agean peoples 
Hebrews: origins of, 1938, 194; 
entry into Palestine, 251, 307-8, 
340; kingdom of, 351 
Heliopolis, SISo: 182, 337 
Her acleopolitan dy nasties, 
222 
Heresy of Akhenaten, 302 
ages -sha, 169, 176, 213, 227, 267, 
79 
Herkhuf, exploits of, 179-181 
Hierakonpolis, 135, 137, 143 


King, 


218-9, 


Hierarchic organization, 78," 85, 
101 
Seeroe spas See Picture-writ- 


ng 
Hittites, 193, 195, 234, 290; eae 
of, 236-8 : early history, "242: 
Palestine, 240, 251, 352 hoe 
traits of, 309 ; relations with New 
Kingdom, 977, 292; empire of, 


303 ff. 

Horites, 209 

Horse, ‘introduction of lh, VO 
235, 239, 242 

Horus, 128, 193-4) 187, 214384182. 


185, 226, 279 ; Followers of, 128, 
134, 140, 144, 155-6, 268 
Hospitality, duty of, 191 
Howitt, 22, 56, 71, 80 
Fir ozny, 237 


368 


Hyksés, 247-54, 256, 289 
Hymns, Egyptian, quoted, 185, 
8 


Ideograms. See Picture-writing 

Imperialism, character of ancient, 
176, 179, 206, 264, 281-2, 298, 
353. See also Economic bases, 


War 

Imports: into Egypt, 137, 170, 171, 
177, 181, 226, 233; into Aigean, 
294; into Mesopotamia, 206, 215, 
88 

Incest, prohibition of, 13 

Individual, position of in primitive 
societies, 53, 77, 92 


Individualism not innate in man, 
1 


nace of totem, 29, 33, 40, 

Initiation ceremonies, tribal char- 
acter of, 66, 79, 112 

Insignia, magic properties of, 107, 
132, 135 

International relations in second 
millennium, 295, 311, 324 ff. 

Internationalism, 298. 300, 302 

Intichiwma ceremony, 19, 66, 69 

Iron, use of, 163, 171, 238, 251, 
313, 331-2, 338 

Irrigation, 125, 148, 203 

Ishtar, journey of, to Egypt, 291, 
334 ; "worshipped in Egypt, 296 

Israel, 251, 339-340, 351 

Israelites, 190, 240 


Jacob, 251 

Jerusalem, 240, 262, 300, 305, 352 

Joppa, 262, 286, 351 

Jordan, 188, 190, 219, 262, ° 308, 
51 

Joseph, 150, 251 

Judgment, magical, 48 


Ka, 8, 46, 145 

Kadesh, 262, 270, 274, 276-7, 283, 
307, 310, "398 ; battle of, 314, 
329-7 

Kames, King, 258 

Karnak, 366. 269, 278, 308, 325 


Kassites, 195, 934-5, 939, 243, 287, 
307 
Keftiu. See Aigean peoples, Crete 


Khattusil I, 303 

Khattusil ct 324-332, 335, 345 

Khazanu defined, 282 

Kheops, 152 191 

Khian, 250, 959-3 

Kings: and agriculture, 106, 133, 
148; ritual killing of, 150: and 
weather, 333 

Kinship, 11 ff. 27°97. 80 

Kish, 201, 203, 206 

Kizwadana, 312, 328, 3380 


Legislation, 
67 





INDEX 


Knossos, 253, 294, 295 

Kula traffic, 109 

Kush, 168, 923 295 

Kwakiutl (Indian tribe), 33, 35, 
59, 88, 92, 100, 105 


Labour, supply of, 179 
Lagash, 205, 210, 215 
Lake- dwellings, 166 
Land bridges, prehistoric, 116, 166 
Langdon, S., 202, 205, 207, 211 
Languages: “of Egypt, 156, 158 ; of 
Hither Asia, 190, 193, 199, 235, 
237, 240, 280. See also Aryans, 
Hittites, Semites 
Law, primitive, 63, 75, 102 
Laws of Hammurabi, 216-7 
Lebanon, 163, 181, 183, 188, 207, 
231, 262, 275, 304, 308, 348, 350 
primitive organ of, 


Letters: of Hammurabi, 216; of 
Hittite kings, 325, 331; of 
Pharaohs, 80, 987-299, 307, 330; 
of provincial governors, 284. 

Lévy-Bruhl, 106 

Libyans, 167, 173, 178, 184, 2138, 
222, 279, 387, 346 

Literature. See Hymns, Letters, 
Poem, Tales 

Local kinship, 28 

Local organization as opposed to 
totemic, 56, 58, 70 

Lotanu, 297, 245, 266, 275, 282, 
308 ; defined, 262 

Lubbock, iW, 

Lycians, 290, 311, 337 


Magan, 207 

Magic: forces, 46, 106; as a factor 
in personal power, 64, 104; func- 
tions of Pharaoh, 146 ff., 973 

Magicians as kings, 64, 107, 133 

Maine, Sir Henry, 58 

Mana, eg 75, 106, 355 

Manishtusu, 207 

Marduk, God of Babylon, 216 

Mari, 201, 203, 205-6 

Maritime trade, 171; 225 


Markets, search for, 206, 222, 
266 
Marriage: regulation of, 22 #f.; 


power acquired by, 36, 87; matri- 
local, 41 

Marriage- alliances between early 
kings, 287, 290-2, 307 


Matriarchy witee, "41. See also 
Uterine 

Matrilinear. See Uterine 

Matrilocal. See Marriage 

Mauss, 46, 48, 91, 98, 102 

Mazaka. 242 

Mazoi, 168, 174, 258, 265 


McLennan, Le, 39 


INDEX 


Medes, 235 

Medicine-men, 64, 68, 72 

Mediterranean : region, description 
of, 115-9; race, 124-5, 158, 166-7 

Megiddo, 208, 262, 270, O75; battle 
of, 272-4 

Melanesia, 31, 46, 102, 108, 355 

Memphis, "134, 136, 146, 218, 248, 

259 


Memphite dynasties, 177 ff., 218 

Menes, King, 128, 137, 152, 173, 
174, 207, 210, 355 

Men’s society, 79, 103 

Mercenaries : employment of, 170, 
E7S, 222, 311 313; ‘as king- 
makers, 348-9 

Merinau, "240, 275, 282 

Merneptah, King, 249, 337-340 

Mesolithic remains, 119 

Mesopotamia: climate and geo- 
graphy, 188; ethnology, 200-2, 
212, 215, 235 

Metallurgy, discovery of, 120, 155, 
174, 200, 238. See also Iron 

Meyer, Eduard, 130, 144, 152, 196, 
38 


Migrations of Semites, 194, 212 
(see also Abraham); of Philis- 
tines, 342 

Militarist spirit in Egypt, 265 

Mineral resources, control of, 163, 
206, 236, 240, 242, 266, 331 

Mitanni, 193, 234, 264, 269; 275, 
279 ; ethnology, 240-1; relations 
with Kgypt, 289-294; decline of, 
303 ff. 

Moieties, 16. See Phratries 

Monopolies, State: mines, 175, 227; 
long-distance trade, 181, 226 : 
land, 148, 148 

Monotheism and imperialism, 300 

Morgan, J. de, 119, 199 

Mummies, M7: 257° 

Murder, ritual. See King 

Mursil, King, 310, 312 "336, 345 

Mutallu, King, 310-3, 314, 320, 
324, 345 

Mutemuia, Queen, 291 

Mycene, 294 

Mystic nature of clan, 12, 46, 48 

Mysticism, 51 

Mythology as reflection of history, 
67, 70, 75-6, 101, 105 


Nabateans, 194 

Naharina, 241, 264, 267, 270, 276, 
303, 307, 311 

Names: inheritance of, 33, 35, 90, 
93; magic force of, 108, 140 

Napata, 149, 260-1 

Naram- Sin, King, 207, 210 

Narmer, King, 136, 173, 210 

Narrinyeri (Austr alian tribe), 30 

Nationalism, Egyptian, 153, 264 








369 


Naval warfare, 207, 214, 344 

Navigation, 123, 165, 171, 177, 228, 
294, 350 

Negada, 120, 140, 152, 155, 209 

Negroes and Egypt, 167, 172, Lis; 
223, 296 

Nekheb, 132, 140 

Neolithic remains, 190, 208 

Nippur, 201-2, 205, 216 

Nomads, characters Of, aloe ed, 
170, 172, 196, 204 

Nomadism, effects of, 
organization, 51 

Nomes, 123, 130 

Nubians, 168, 172, “118; 2227258; 
266, 279 


on social 


Oligarchy in primitive societies, 
86 


Omaxtalale, legend of, 105 

Orontes, 188, 190, 192, 219; 230, 
240, 262, O75, 310 

Oscans, 341 

Osiris, 6, 133, 153 


Paleolithic remains, 116, 118 

Palermo Stone, 131, "145, "148 

Palestine, 164, 184, 186, 188, 190, 
193, 195, 201, 219, 215, 218, 297° 
240, 245, 951, 259° 

Parents-in- law, privileges of, 31 

Parkinson, 102 

Patriarchal family, 38, 86; among 
Semites, 196-7 

Patrilinear kinship, 28, 34, 70; 
PoE une uterine, 27, 30, 33, 35, 
8 


Patriotism of Egyptians, 185, 222 

Peace, desire for in fifteenth cen- 
tury, 296 

Pepi T 170, 213, 218, 299; II, 179, 
uf 


Petrie, Sir Flinders, 120, 152 

Pharaoh, character. of, A 5, 143 
3 meaning of name, 142 note 

Philistines, 341, 346, 351-2 

Phoenicians, 226, 939, 251, 350 

Phratry, 15, 19, 93, 62, 80, 83, 94 

Picture-writing, 125, 901, 237° 303 

Pinnaru, 72 

Piracy, 336, 347 

Poem of Pentaur quoted, 314, 323 

Policemen, 169 

Potlatch, 86, 90 ff., 356 

Pottery : Egyptian, 119-123, 156; 
ffigean, 171, 293; Minoan, 233, 
293 ; of ‘Susa, 199” 

Priest kings, 135 

Promiscuity, alleged, 39, 53 

Property, real, rise of, 108, 142, 
196 


Protectorates, system of, adopted 
by Egypt, 181, 284-6 
Pumpelly, 200 


370 


Punishments, use 
society, 65, 73 
Punt, Land of, 155, 225, 279 

Pyramids, meaning of, 152 


in primitive 


Quaternary epoch, 116-8 
Quibell, 120 


Ra (sun god), 128, 138, 155, 182, 
249, 2538, 257, 270, 296-7, 316 
Racial types: Egyptian, 124, 157; 
of Hither Asia, 191, 199, 235, 
237, 241, 264, ” 350; of North 
Africa, 167-9 : Peoples of the 

North, 338 
Rameses II, 290, 307, 310, 312-335, 
337; ITT, 841-5 
Regalia. See Insignia 
Reincarnation of ancestors, 78 
Rejuvenation of Pharaoh, 151-2 
Religion: as basis of power, 68, 
101, 109; as support for im- 
perialism, 180-1, 211, 261, 296, 
300; connection with trade, 108, 
184: totemic, 17, 45, 49, 25 ve 
social origins of, 49, "52, 66 
Representative gover nment 
primitive societies, 73 
Republics in Syria, 282 
Respect, principle of, 95 
Revolution, religious, 216, 297 
Rivers cited, 31, 79 
Rome, sur vivals of uterine kinship 
at, 35 


Sahara, 115, 118 
Sanctions, for breach of taboo, 16, 


Sardes, 242 

Sargon of Agade, 193, 206 

Saru (Council of Elders in 
124, 130 

Sayce, A. H., 237 

Schurtz, 22 

Schweinfurth, 161, 164 

Scorpion, King, 136, 148 

Script: Egyptian, 158; Elamite, 
199; cuneiform, 201; Aramaic, 
351. See also Alphabet 

Soret societies, primitive, 46, 92, 


Sed festival, 151 ff. 

Segmentation of clan, 55 

Semites, 176, 190 ff., 901, 234, 239, 
250, 264 ; unity of, 193- 5; cradle 
of, 196 ; nomadic, 196-8 

Semitic influence in Egypt, 158, 
161, 182 

Senusert, King, 221, 232-3, 245 

Seqininra, King, 249, 256 

Sergi, 125, 166 

Seth, 186, 247, 253, 279 

Seti I, 308-310, 326, 336 

Sexes, separation of, 21 


in 


f., 210 
Egypt), 





INDEX 


Shakalasha, 311, 338 
Shardana, 290, 311,313, 337, 


347 
Shechem, 245 
Shemsu-Hor. See Horus, Fol- 
lowers of 
Shinar. See Mesopotamia 


Ships. See Byblos, Navigation 

Shubbiluliuma, 292, 303, 307, 311 

Sidon, 209, 989 

Sieges, 183, 259, 274, 324 

Simeon, tribe of, 259 

Sinai, mines of, "174 ff., 207, 227 

Sinope, 242 

Sinuhet, tale of, 228-233 

Smerkhet, 175, 191 

Snefru, 178, 181 

Socialism in Egypt. 
polies, State 

Solar : cult, 182; disc, 1385, 297; 
name, 6, 333 ; or igin of Phar aoh, 
296 

Solomon, King, 352 

Sothic cycle, 134 

Spencer and Gillen, 14, 18, 28, 31, 
65, 68, 78 

Spencer, Herbert, 17, 53, 111 

Spirits, 79, 93, 100 

Strategy, p yart played by in ancient 
warfare, PD 


See Mono- 


Strehlow, 28, 78 

Sumerians, 156, 195; race and 
language, 200; history, 201-5; 
212, 216, 239 

Sun. See Solar 


Sunrise caused by Pharaoh, 147 

Susa, 199, 215 

Swanton, 33, 87, 95, 98 

Syria. See ’Naharina, Pheenicia, 
Zahi 


Taanach, 270, 281, 352 

Taboo: nature of” 
Egypt, 149 

Tactics. See Battles 

Tales: popular, 228, 249, 256, 
285; mariners’, 228 

Tanis, 251, 253 

Tarquin, 36 

Tello, 155, 215 

Territorial groups, 


17, 72; in 


formation of, 


26, %, 58, 86, 89, 93; in Egypt, 
130 f. 

Theban monarchy, 170, 221-234, 
246, 252, 256 


Thinite monarchy, 
163, 173-7, 210 

Thomson, 200 

Thothmes I, 249, 260-1, 266, 276; 
TII, 261, 269-279; IV, 280, 290 

Tiglath-Pileser I, 348; TII, 352 

Timber, search for, 163, 206, 215, 
233, 338 

Tlinkit (Indian tribe), 33, 83, 87, 
92, 95 


137-142, 154, 


INDEX 371 


Toleration, religious, in Egypt, 296 | 


Totemism: nature of, 28 ff., 44, 
75; decay of, 97, 86, 101; as 
religion, 80; survivals in Egypt, 
4, 6, 143-4, 353 

Trade, at first connected with 
religion, 92, 108-9; beginnings 
of, 137; as factor in diffusion 
of ideas, 183. See also Economic, 
Exports, Imports, Maritime, 
Monopolies 

Trade routes, command of, 171, 
225, 240, 242, 262 

Treaties: Hittites and Egypt, 292 ; 
text, 326-8; Hittite, 312; com- 
peter Egypt, and Babylon, 

88 
gue paid to Egypt, 181, 268, 
8 


Troad, peoples from, in Syria, 311 

Troglodytes, 169, 176, 184, 195, 
223, 225, 227 

Tukulti-Inurta, 335 

Turin Papyrus, 126, 131, 247 

Turkestan, 200, 235 

Tutankhamen, 302, 307 

-Tyre, 209, 282-3, 310, 346 


Unification of Egypt, 131, 137 
147; of Babylonia, 216 

Unity, gods as principles of, 205, 
300 

Ur, 201, 203, 215, 219, 240 

Uterine: clan, 39 ff.; kinship, 20, 
24, 28-9, 33, 37 ff., 70; in Egypt, 
123; at Rome, 35; uncle, 32, 34, 
38, 40, 42 


=) 





Van, 195, 243 

Varuna, 241 

Vicinity, effect of, 51 

Village: relation to clan, 59, 62, 
64, 94, 180, 197, 356; chief, 94 


War: effect on social organiza- 
tion, 112; in _ predynastic 
Egypt, 180; defensive or offen- 
sive, 146, 169-70, 172, 176, 177 
Be 183, 207, 218, 223, 246, 259, 


Warramunga (Australian tribe), 
69, 91 

Weapons. See Armament 

Webster, 102 

Weill, 249 

Wheat. See Grains 

Wite, position of, 70 

Winckler, 326 

Women: position of, 17, 30, 40, 
42; sanctity of, 17 

Words, magic force of, 181 

Writing, 125, 135, 158. See also 
Alphabet, Cuneiform, Picture- 
writing, Script 


Yemen, 156, 163-4, 187, 193, 223 


Zahi, 264, 275-6, 291, 302, 333, 
343 


Zalu, 269, 276, 309, 314 
Zariku, 215 

Zekal, 341, 346, 351 
Zoser, 150, 178, 181 


pet ee ee ee ee 
PRINTED iN GREAT BRITAIN BY BILLING AND SONS, LTD., GUILDFORD AND ESHER, 








: PAE EISTORY OF 
CIVILIZATION 


A COMPLETE HISTORY OF MANKIND FROM 
PREHISTORIC TIMES TO THE PRESENT DAY 
IN NUMEROUS VOLUMES DESIGNED 
TO FORM A COMPLETE 
LIBRARY OF SOCIAL 
EVOLUTION 


Edited by 
C KVOGDEN 


of Magdalene College, Cambridge 


Published by 


KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., Ltd. 
BROADWAY HOUSE: 68-74, CARTER LANE, LONDON 


MEPAMSSEEMWSCANEDE EAMES EPMO MNESSAMNIDEEMNEDC EMME AMIDE EAMES PM WDE EMNSBEEASD 


j 
Thi a) ne 4 


esc iy 






ve 
%, 
“9 


“WOUES SHV" i a 


up ae 
ey ey 
: ae. e: 











rec diiastibe Wey. real edna s- 

Madl Tyas FAT OT CANTY HOTELES A 
CTT (2H BOe IMI aks 
RIO OF CIE 

_ SBI. ace (AABAI:! aaa 

: er ap a alae 


ch SARS. et aa 







s : ‘y e } , 
y Ke t Cj nae ios , 
| 
eextiwkh ls x7 %, Sh Subokagith ~ 
" i oe » -_ 






.< 


ors 


4 
«< 


1 
p> age? 
Brie< 


A 
We 





G | - 4 
3 : 
P } , om | : 
Sm phos sh iaahiel, fa 
A | rate Oo: i RAL. a HOMaRT AM AE 
vom Ss, pease ee Pa: a Kae 
| , Nee sy aa ha of j 
a? ‘ , . , bd AP Thee 
| ‘ , . os ed Mine 14 < 
ih i Meare lee i cP a, 


THE HISTORY OF CIVILIZATION 


HIS series marks one of the most ambitious adventures in the 

: annals of book publishing. Its aim is to present in accessible 

form the results of modern research and modern scholarship 
throughout the whole range of the Social Sciences—to summarize in one 
comprehensive synthesis the most recent findings and theories of 
historians, anthropologists, archeologists, sociologists, and all consci- 
entious students of civilization. 

To achieve success in this stupendous undertaking, the arrangement 
of the series, has been entrusted to the experienced editorship of C. K. 
Ogden, M.A., of Magdalene College, Cambridge. The new French 
series, L’ Evolution de  Humanité, in which the leading savants of France 
are collaborating with the Director of the Bibliothéque de Synthése 
Historique, M. Henri Berr, is being incorporated. Distinguished 
historians, both European and American, are contributing volumes in 
their several departments. Above all, while detailed and very special 
monographs have been avoided, no attempt to “ write down” to a low 
level has been made. 

The field has been carefully mapped out, as regards both subjects 
and periods; and, though the instalments will be published as they are 
ready, the necessary chronological sequence will be secured by the 
fact that the volumes of the French collection will be used as a nucleus. 
Each work will be entirely independent and complete in itself, but 
the volumes in a given group will be found to supplement one another 
when considered in relation to a particular subject or period. 

The volumes are uniformly bound in a fine art-cambric cloth, with 
specially designed gold lettering and emblem, royal octavo in size, 
and usually illustrated. 

THE TIMES LITERARY SUPPLEMENT devoted a leading 
article to the first four volumes, in which the series was described as 
being ‘‘ composed by all the talents ”’. 

THE MANCHESTER GUARDIAN wrote that “ the experiment is 
one of great interest. Its difficulty is also great. The intention is to 
provide something more than an encyclopedia or a series of mono- 
graphs. The aim is to preserve a certain community of plan while 


3 


giving a free hand to each author in his own section. It is an heroic 
attempt, which will be sympathetically watched, to bring some light 
into the vast mass of ill-organized knowledge which we owe to modern 
research and so make it available in the end for the guidance of the 
world ”’. 


NATURE, the leading scientific journal, in a six-column review, 
provides a striking summary of the aims and objects of the series: “The 
History of Civilization promises to be perhaps the most important 
contribution so far undertaken towards the task of organization and 
systematization of the social studies. A glance at the prospectus makes 
us anticipate a library of masterpieces, for the best workers of France, 
Great Britain, and some other countries are contributing from their 
own speciality and are attempting to bring it into line with the con- 
tributions from neighbouring fields and with the results of general 
sociology. Including all the volumes of the important French collection, 
L’Evolution de ? Humanité, the English library contains additions and 
improvements which will place it above its continental counterpart. 
The volumes already issued bear out our best hopes. Arranged so as to 
include all manifestations of human culture, the series follows roughly 
a combined historical and geographical plan. Starting from the most 
comprehensive picture, the empty earth in the midst of the empty 
universe awaiting the arrival of man, it passes then to the gradual 
development of organic life and the early history of mankind, accom- 
panied by a series of introductory works which give an account of the 
various aspects of human culture: social organization, language, 
geographical and racial factors, man’s political evolution and primeval 
domesticity. The story then begins at the traditional cradle of culture, 
the ancient East, on the holy banks of the Nile, the Euphrates and 
Tigris, and on the shores of the Mediterranean, where the origins and 
history of the early Empires and their civilizations are described. 

After having been shown the growth of the Aégean civilization and the 
formation of the Greek people we study the history of Greece in all 
its wonderful cultural achievements. Next, hegemony has to be 
surrendered to Rome with its laws, politics, and economic organization. 
This brings us to the vast areas occupied by the Teutonic peoples to the 
North, the Persian, Indian and Chinese civilization to the East, and the 
Mongol cultures of Central Asia. ‘These will be studied in a series of 
monographs. . . . The second division will contain volumes on 
Christian religion, on the break-up of the Roman Empire, on the 
religious imperialisms of Christianity and Islam, on the political, social, 


4 


economic, and intellectual evolution in the Middle Ages and modern 
times. The English library contains, besides, several special sections, 
one on the histories of various subjects, such as medicine, money, 
costume, witchcraft, etc. ; a section on Oriental culture; on historical 
ethnology ; and a few more sections not yet exhaustively announced, 
dealing with modern history. ‘This summary does not do full justice 
to the merits of the plan and of the achievements of the series, so far 
as they have been laid before us ae 


The following plan, comprising upwards of eighty titles, though not 
definitive, will serve to convey a general notion of the nature and scope of 
the enterprise :* 


A. PRE-HISTORY AND ANTIQUITY 


I IntTropuctTion AND Pre-Hisrory 


*Social Organization W SH Reakigers 
The Earth Before History E. Perrier 
Prehistoric Man F. de Morgan 
*The Dawn of European Civilization V. Gordon Childe 
A Linguistic Introduction to History JF. Vendryes 
A Geographical Introduction to History L. Febvre 
Race and History EL. Pittard 
*The Aryans V. Gordon Childe 
From Tribe to Empire A, Moret 
*Woman’s Place in Simple Societies F. L. Myers 
*Cycles in History F. L. Myers 
*The Diffusion of Culture G. Elliot Smith 
*The Migration of Symbols D. A. Mackenzie 
II Tue Earty Empires 
The Nile and Egyptian Civilization A. Moret 
*Colour Symbolism of Ancient Egypt D, A. Mackenzie 
The Mesopotamian Civilization L. Delaporte 
The Aigean Civilization G. Glotz 
III Greece 
The Formation of the Greek People A. Fardé 
*Ancient Greece at Work G. Glotz 
The Religious Thought of Greece C. Sourdille 
The Art of Greece W. Deonna and A. de Ridder 
Greek Thought and the Scientific Spirit L. Robin 
The Greek City and its Institutions G. Glotz 
Macedonian Imperialism P. Fouguet 


* An asterisk denotes that the volume does not form part of the French collection, 
L’ Evolution de ? Humanité. 


5 


IV Rome 


Ancient Italy 

The Roman Spirit in Religion and Art 
Roman Political Institutions 

Rome the Law-Giver 

Ancient Economic Organization 

The Roman Empire 

*Ancient Rome at Work 

The Celts 


V Bryvonp THE Roman EMPIRE 


Germany and the Roman Empire 
Persia 

Ancient China and Central Asia 
*A Thousand Years of the ‘artars 
India 

*The Heroic Age of India 

*Caste and Race in India 


*The Life of Buddha as Legend and History 


L. Homo 

A. Grenier 
L. Homo 

F. Declareuil 
F. Toutain 
V. Chapot 
P. Louts 

H. Hubert 


H. Hubert 

C. Huart 

M. Granet 

E. H. Parker 
(Ed.) S. Léivt 
N. K. Sitdhanta 
G. S. Ghurye 
E. H. Thomas 


CHRISTIANITY AND THE MIDDLE AGES 


I Tue Oricins or CHRISTIANITY 


Israel and Judaism 

Jesus and the Birth of Christianity 
The Formation of the Church 

The Advance of Christianity 
*History and Literature of Christianity 


IL Tue Break-up oF THE EMPIRE 


The Dissolution of the Western Empire 


The Eastern Empire 
Charlemagne 


The Collapse of the Carlovingian Empire 


The Origins of the Slavs 
*Popular Life in the East Roman Empire 
*The Northern Invaders 


III Reticiovus IMPERIALISM 


Islam and Mahomet 

The Advance of Islam 
Christendom and the Crusades 
The Organization of the Church 


6 


A. Lods 
C. Guignebert 
C. Guignebert 
C. Guignebert 
P. de Labriolle 


F. Lot 

C. Diehl 

L. Halphen 

F. Lot 

(Ed.) P. Boyer 
N. Baynes 

B. S. Phillpotts 


E. Doutté 

L. Barrau-Dihigo 
P. Alphandéry 
R. Genestal 


IV Tue Art or THE Mippue AGEs 


The Art of the Middle Ages P. Lorquet 
*The Papacy and the Arts E. Strong 


V Reconstitution or Monarcuic Power 


The Foundation of Modern Monarchies C. Petit-Dutarllis 


The Growth of Public Administration E. Meynial 

The Organization of Law E. Meyntal 
VI Socrat anp Economic EvoLurTion 

The Development of Rural and Town Life G. Bourgin 

Maritime Trade and the Merchant Gilds P. Botssonnade 

*Life and Work in the Middle Ages P. Botssonnade 

*The Life of Women in Medieval Times Etleen Power 


*Travel and Travellers in the Middle Ages (d.) A. P. Newton 


VIL Inrev_tectuaL Evo.uTIon 


Vill 


Education in the Middle Ages G. Huisman 
Philosophy in the Middle Ages E. Bréhier 
Science in the Middle Ages Abel Rey and P. Boutroux 
From tHe Mippie Aczs to Mopern ‘Times 

Nations of Western and Central Europe P. Lorquet 
Russians, Byzantines, and Mongols (Ed.) P. Boyer 
The Birth of the Book G. Renaudet 
*The Grandeur and Decline of Spain C. Hughes Hartmann 
*The Influence of Scandinavia on England M. E. Seaton 
*The Philosophy of Capitalism T. E. Gregory 
*The Prelude to the Machine Age D. Russell 


*Life and Work: Fifteenth to Eighteenth Century G. Renard 


A special group of volumes will be devoted to 


(1) 


(2) 


Supyect Histrories 


*The History of Medicine C. G. Cumston 
*The History of Money T. E. Gregory 
*The History of Costume M. H1ler 
*The History of Witchcraft M. Summers 
*The History of ‘Taste F. [saac 
*The History of Oriental Literature E, Powys Mathers 
*The History of Music Cecil Gray 
HisroricaL ETHNOLOGY 

*The Ethnology of India T. C. Hodson 
*The Peoples of Asia L. H. Dudley Buxton 
*The Threshold of the Pacific Gk) Fox 
*The South American Indians Rafael Karsten 


, 


In the Sections devoted to MODERN HISTORY the majority of titles 
will be announced later. Many volumes are, however, in active preparation, 


and of these the first to be published will be 


*The Restoration Stage M. Summers 
“London Life in the Eighteenth Century §M. Dorothy George 
*China and Europe in the Eighteenth Century A. Reichwein 


The following volumes have already been issued. They are arranged 
roughly in the order in which they were published. But their place in the 
scheme of the whole series may be discovered from the above list : 


THE EARTH BEFORE HISTORY: Man’s Origin and the 
Origin of Life 

By EDMOND PERRIER, late Hon. Director of the Natural History 
Museum of France. 

With 4 maps, 15s. net. 

“Tt goes back to the birth of the world and the transformations of land and 
water, and takes us through the growth of life on the planet, the primitive 
animal forms, the peopling of the seas, and the forms of life in the primary, 
secondary, and tertiary periods, to the growth of the human form. Thus, start- 


ing from the origin of matter, it leads us in easy stages to homo sapiens himself.” 


Daily News. 
** A remarkable volume.”—Yorkshire Post. 


PREHISTORIC MAN : A General Outline of Prehistory 
By JACQUES DE MORGAN, late Director of Antiquities in Egypt. 
With 190 illustrations and maps, I2s. 6d. net. 


“A notable and eminently readable study in the early history of civilization, 
and one well worth its place in the great series now being issued by the publishers. 
It bears on every page the impress of the personality of its author, who strives 
to give the reader a clear, composite picture of early civilization, taking one topic 
after another.” —Nation. 

“A masterly summary of our present knowledge at a low price. As a full 
survey the book has no rival, and its value is enhanced by the lavish illustrations.” 


New Leader. 


SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 
By W. H. R. RIVERS, LL.D., F.R.S. Preface by Proressor G. 


Exxuiotr SmItu. 
Ios. 6d. net. 


“* Social Organization is the first volume of the series of historical works on the 
whole range of human activity. May the present book be of good augury for the 
rest! ‘To maintain so high a standard of originality and thoroughness will be 
no easy task.””— Jane Harrison, in Nation. 

“The book is a great contribution to the sum of human knowledge in the 
region of pure sociology.”—Daily News. 


8 


THE THRESHOLD OF THE PACIFIC: an Account of 
the Social Organization, Magic, and Religion of the People 
of San Cristoval in the Solomon Islands 


By C. E. FOX, Litr.D. Preface by Prorgssor G. Exrtior Smitu. 
With 14 plates and 40 text illustrations, 18s. net. 


“A masterpiece. One of the very best contributions to ethnology we possess. 

It has, besides its intrinsic value as a masterly record of savage life, also an in- 

direct one ; it is a remarkable testimony to the indispensable need of scientific 

method for the observer. His account of magical ritual] and spells will become 

a classical source for students. The account of the life-history of the individual 

is depicted with a clearness and fulness unrivalled in ethnographic literature 
Times Literary Supplement. 


LANGUAGE: a Linguistic Introduction to History 


By J. VENDRYES, Professor in the University of Parts. 
16s. net. 


“A book remarkable for its erudition and equally remarkable for originality 
and independence of thought.”—Swunday Times. 

“As an introduction to philology this volume is a splendid piece of haute 
vulgarisation, for which anyone who at all loves words or who is at all curious 
about language, must be grateful. It covers nearly all the ground from every 
useful angle. A wide, level-headed, and erudite study.”—Nation. 


A GEOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION TO HISTORY 


By LUCIEN FEBVRE, Professor in the University of Strasburg. 
With 7 maps, 16s. net. 


“‘ A masterpiece of criticism, as witty as it is well-informed, and teeming with 

nice observations and delicate turns of argument and phrase.” 
Times Literary Supplement. 

““A broad, clear-headed introduction to the fascinating study of human 
geography. It is much more than a text-book for the student: it is a work 
that anyone with no knowledge of geography can read with avidity, for it is the 
greatest of pleasures to watch the clear logical thought of the writer rapidly 
treating with masterly power these great and important topics.” —Nation. 


THE HISTORY AND LITERATURE OF 
CHRISTIANITY : from Tertullian to Boethius 
By PIERRE DE LABRIOLLE, Professor of Literature at the 
University of Pottiers. Foreword by CarDINAL GasQugsrT. 
25s. net. 


“A masterly volume. A scholar of the finest accomplishment, an enthusiast 
for his subject,,and himself an artist in letters, he has produced a book compre- 
hensive and authoritative, and also a joy to read from the first page to the last.” 

Universe. 
“¢ This interesting and valuable book.” —W. L. Courtney, in Datly Telegraph. 


9 


LONDON LIFE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 


By M. DOROTHY GEORGE. 
With 8 plates, 21s. net. 


“Mrs. George, by her cumulative method, imparts a shuddering impression 
of the brutalised life led by the masses under the first two Georges. Her work 
is full of eloquent detail. All who like to get at close quarters with history will 
feel immensely debtors to her industrious research and faculty of clear statement. 
And she will have the satisfaction of restoring faith to many minds in the reality 
of progress.” —Odserver. 

“One of the best pieces of research in social and economic history which 
have appeared for many years.” —WNation., 

“‘ An admirable study.’’—J. L. Hammonp, in Lhe New Statesman. 


A THOUSAND YEARS OF THE TARTARS 
By E. H. PARKER, Professor of Chinese in the Victoria University 
of Manchester. 


With 5 illustrations and maps, I2s. 6d. net. 
“Professor Parker takes us back to a period roughly contemporaneous with 
that of the foundation of the Roman empire, and shows their history to be, like 
that of the Northern barbarians and Rome, a constant struggle with China. 
With an unfamiliar subject the book is not an easy one to read, but the author 
has done all that was possible to enliven his subject and has certainly succeeded 
in giving us a most valuable text-book.” —Saturday Review. 


CHINA AND EUROPE: ‘their Intellectual and Artistic 
Relations in the Eighteenth Century 
By ADOLPH REICHWEIN. 
With 24 plates, 12s. 6d. net. 


‘¢ Among the volumes of the monumental History of Civilization, this study 
of the influence of Chinese art and thought on the European art and thought 
of the eighteenth century will find not the least popular and distinguished place. 
The chapter headed ‘ Rococo ’ will be of especial interest to connoisseurs. 

The illustrations are numerous and beautiful.” —Sunday Times. 


THE DAWN OF EUROPEAN CIVILIZATION 


By V. GORDON CHILDE, B.Lrrr: 
With 198 illustrations and 4 maps, 16s. net. 


“‘ Higher praise of Mr. Childe’s book, which forms a volume of the monu- 
mental History of Civilization could scarcely be given than to say that it isin all 
respects worthy of the volumes which preceded it.””—Sunday Times. 


Io 


“He has done a very great service to learning, and given a clear and reliable 
outline of the earliest civilization of Europe. His book ‘ fills a gap ’ indeed.” 
—WNation. 

‘A very fine piece of work.””—Manchester Guardian. 

“A work of supreme importance . . . places the writer in the very 
front rank of European archeologists.” —Glasgow Herald. 


MESOPOTAMIA: the Babylonian and Assyrian Civili- 


zation 
By L. DELAPORTE, Professor in the Catholic Institute of Parts. 
With 60 illustrations and maps, I6s. net. 


The first general survey of Assyrian and Babylonian life and history to 
embody the results of post-war researches. Thus Babylonian is presented for 
the first time with its true historical background. Through the Jews the 
Babylonians have profoundly influenced Christendom ; the Code of Hammurabi 
was the basis of Mosaic legislation, the Flood and other stories from Genesis 
originated in Babylonia, and the commercial law of the third millenium antici- 
pates modern practice. 


THE AEGEAN CIVILIZATION 


By G. GLOTZ, Professor of Greek History in the University of Parts. 
With 95 illustrations and maps, 16s. net. 


The ancient and elaborate Aegean civilization first revealed by Schliemann 
and more fully disclosed by the excavations of Sir Arthur Evans in Crete dating 
from 1900, is described in a style of amazing richness, informed throughout by 
sound scholarship. This people, who lived so long in luxury and peace, who 
cultivated the arts with such a developed esthetic sense, who finally passed so 
much of their heritage to ancient Greece, play an important part in history, 
while their civilization provides numerous striking similarities with modern 
religion, fashion, sport—in fact, with modern life in general. 


THE PEOPLES OF ASIA 


By L. H. DUDLEY BUXTON, M.A., F.S.A., Lecturer in Physical 
Anthropology in the University of Oxford. 


With 8 plates, 12s. 6d. net. 


A comprehensive account of the people of Asia, which welds together the 
numerous scattered researches and shows the most conspicuous gaps in our 
knowledge. Special attention has been directed throughout to the biological 
as opposed to the cultural aspect. In addition to chapters dealing with the 
bigger racial problems, special sections are devoted to the study of different 
regions, Western Asia, India, Japan, China, and Indonesia. 


II 


The following publications are nearing publication. They are arranged 
roughly in the order in which they will appear. Their place in the scheme 
of the whole series may be discovered from the list : 


RACE AND HISTORY: an Ethnological Introduction to 
History 


By E. PITTARD, Professor of Anthropology in the University of 


Geneva. 


With 9g illustrations and maps, about 21s. net. 


This volume is intended to serve as a companion to Febvre’s Geographical 
Introduction to History, which estimated the value of “environment ” as a factor 
in history. The present volume considers the “ racial ” factor, the anthro- 
pological reality which depends on somatic characters, build, height, colour of 
hair and eyes, craniological and facial form, etc. This the author carefully 
distinguishes from such artificial entities as peoples, nations, civilizations, or 
language groups. 


THE MIGRATION OF SYMBOLS, and their Relations to 
Beliefs and Customs 


By DONALD A. MACKENZIE, author of “ Ancient Man in 
Britain’. 
Illustrated, about 12s. 6d. net. 


The author deals comprehensively with the Swastika Symbol, the Spiral 
Symbol, Ear Symbols, and Tree Symbols. His book begins by showing the 
connexion of certain symbols with the Sun and the Nile, considers the “ Doctrine 
of Cardinal Points”, then its relation to the Doctrine of Mummification. 
Next an explanation is given of the problems of animals, etc., placed in heraldic 
opposition, and we are led to the Flying Disc symbol of Egypt. The work will 
throw much light on the theory of the diffusion of culture from Egypt. 


LIFE AND WORK IN MODERN EUROPE, Fifteenth to 
Eighteenth Century 


By G. RENARD, Professor at the College of France, and G. 
WENTERSSE, Professor at the Lycée Carnot. Introduction by Dr. 


EILEEN Power. 
With 2g illustrations, about 16s. net. 


“It is to fill a notable gap in the books available for English readers that 
this book has been translated. Beginning with the great revolutions which 
were changing the face of society in the sixteenth century, it ends with the 


I2 


beginning in England and France of the great revolutions in the nineteenth. 
The authors deal in turn with the great economic powers of the period. They 
trace the chief characteristics of labour and social life from 1500 to 1800, the 
gradual disappearance of medieval survivals, the development of a national 
economy, the evolution of new economic classes, and the increasing interference 
of government in economic life.”—From the Introduction. 


TRAVEL AND TRAVELLERS IN THE MIDDLE AGES : 


a series of Essays 

Edited by Proressor A. PD. NEWTON. 

With 8 illustrations, about 12s. 6d. net. 

A contribution to the history of travel which throws much light on medieval 
life. ‘The contributions include : The Conception of the World in the Middle 
Ages, by Prof. A. P. Newton ; the Decay of Geographical Knowledge (300-500 
A.D.), by M. C. W. Laistner ; Christian Pilgrimages (500-800 A.D.), by Prof. 
Claude Jenkins; the Viking Age, by Prof. Alan Mawer ; Arab Travellers and 
Merchants (1000-1500 A.D.), by Prof. Sir T. W. Arnold; Land Routes to 
Cathay, by Eileen Power, D.Lit.; Communication in Eastern Europe (800-1200 
A.D.), by Baron A. F. Meyendorff ; Travellers’ Tales, by Prof. A. P. Newton ; 
Prester John, by Prof. Sir E. Denison Ross; Ocean Routes to the Indies, by 
Prof. Edgar Prestage ; etc. 


THE ARYANS 

By V. GORDON CHILDE. 

Illustrated, about 12s. 6d. net. 

The startling discoveries of the Ancient East and the great progress made in 
the study of the prehistoric civilizations of Europe (and especially of Greece) 
seem to make the moment propitious for a fresh survey of the fascinating question 
as to the origin and diffusion of those languages to which we, in common with 
the Ancient Greeks, Romans, and Hindus, are heirs. In fact, no full discussion of 
the Aryan question has appeared in English for the last twenty-five years. 


ANCIENT GREECE AT WORK: an Economic H1story of 
Greece from the Homeric Period to the Roman Conquest 
By G. GLOTZ, Professor of Greek Htstory in the University of Paris. 
With 4g illustrations, about 16s. net. 

A comprehensive account of life and labour in ancient Greece, considered by 
periods, the Homeric, the Archaic, the Athenian, and the Hellenistic. The 
whole economy of ancient Greek life comes under consideration, and the 
author deals in a scholarly and vivid fashion with such subjects as the Family, 
Slaves and Craftsmen, Agriculture and Industry, Piracy and Trade, Money, 
the Classes, Colonization, Socialism and Citizenship, Wages, including a special 
chapter on Sparta. 


13 


THE CIVILIZATION OF THE SOUTH AMERICAN 
INDIANS, with spectal reference to their Magic and 
Religion 
By RAFAEL KARSTEN. 

About 16s. net. 


Based on close personal contact with the natives of South America for five 
years, the book gives a detailed account of their life, in which, of course, magic 
and religion play a dominant part. Chapters are devoted to Ceremonial Body- 
Painting ; Customs relating to Hair, Nails, Head, and Skin; Feather and other 
Ornaments ; Mutilation ; Psychology of Ornamental Art ; Animal and Plant 
Spirits ; Spirits of Inanimate Objects ; Ideas of Generation and Conception ; 


the Male Child-bed ; Magical Sacrifice ; Taboo and Mana; etc. 


FROM TRIBE TO EMPIRE : Social Organization among the 
Primitive Peoples in the Ancient East 
By A. MORET, Director of the Musée Guimet, and G. DAVY, 
Professor of the University of Dijon. 
With 47 illustrations and maps, about 16s. net. 


A study of political organization in the Near East, showing how the claims of 
social life encroached on the freedom of the individual, so that by degrees 
totemic groupings gave way to tribes, kingdoms and empires. This view is 
carefully exemplified in the history of ancient Egypt, Babylonia, and the Near 
East, whose organization is compared and contrasted with that of primitive 
Australian Bushmen and North American Indians. 


THE FORMATION OF THE GREEK PEOPLE 


By A. JARDE, Professor of History at the Lycée Lakanal. 
With 7 maps, about 16s. net. 


Based on the latest findings of archeology, geography, anthropology, and 
philology, this volume gives a clear outline of the nature of the Greek spirit and 
the influences which led to its formation. Attention is paid to political and 
social life, colonial expansion, and intellectual and moral character, in order to 
show the unity of the Greek spirit in its disunion. 


THE HISTORY OF WITCHCRAFT AND 
DEMONOLOGY 


By MONTAGUE SUMMERS, editor of Congreve, Wycherley, 
Otway, etc. 


With 8 full-page illustrations, about 153s. net. 
The author includes in his definition of Witchcraft, sorcery, black magic, 


necromancy, divination, satanism, and every kind of malign occult art. He 


14 


shows how important a part Witchcraft has played among not a few of the most 
powerful and cultured peoples of the human family, tracing its history from the 
earliest times. A copious Bibliography will be included 


THE HISTORY OF MEDICINE, from the time of the 
Pharaohs to the end of the Eighteenth Century 


By C. G. CUMSTON, M.D., Lecturer on the ‘History of Medicine 
and Medical Philosophy in the University of Geneva. With a chapter 
on the Study of the History of Medicine, by F. G. CROOKSHANK, 
Vi ERS CCE, 


About 15s. net. 


This book has been written for the general reader and, as anintroduction tothe © 
history of his chosen profession, for the student of medicine. It contains an 
account of the chief medical schools, theories, and discoveries, and will contain 
much material not to be found in other works. While all unnecessary details 
have been excluded, the book gives a clear and comprehensive history of the 
evolution of the healing art. 


Other early volumes, of which detatls will be announced later, include : 


ART IN GREECE 
By A. pt RIDDER, Director of the Louvre Museum. 


GREEK THOUGHT, and the Origins of the Scientific Spirit 
By L. ROBIN, Professor in the University of Parts. 


MACEDONIAN IMPERIALISM, and the Hellenization of 
the East 


P. JOUGUET, Professor in the U niversity of Parts. 


PRIMITIVE ITALY, and the Beginnings of Roman 
Imperialism 
By LEON HOMO, Professor in the University of Lyons. 


ANCIENT ROME AT WORK: an keonomtc Htstory of 
Rome 
By PAUL LOUIS. 


15 


THE ROMAN SPIRIT in Religion, Thought and Art 
By A. GRENIER, Professor in the U niversity of Strasburg. 


ROMAN LAW 
By J. DECLAREUIL, Professor in the University of Toulouse. 


THE LIFE OF BUDDHA, in Legend and History 


By E. H. THOMAS, D.Lirt., Assistant-Librarian in the University 
Library, Cambridge. 


ANCIENT PERSIA, and Iranian Civilization 
By PROFESSOR CLEMENT HUART. 


LIFE AND WORK IN EUROPE, from the Fifth to Fifteenth 


Centurtes 
By P. BOISSONNADE, Professor in the University of Poitiers. 


a ae 
a .-; ta 


aie 
~ 
mn 


tu 
a ahs 
¥ fay 
a 


wid 
sa 


a) 
i * 
ie di 


_ biniyy peat ii 


Aa 
4 a 


r si rib} 
hf, | 


a 
ah Y, 
2 


: EAN 
4 ii i 
uy Renn? Rigs melee Ya) 
ri) shi ’ 
sb oe WAP a A By ks ie ion 
; 1 Tae 


Mh 


hes hi ‘ine = . 4 Fe Tint BY oy o> ¢ : 

ci _ ok WU Pat A? eee eee ee Ee Ae y pie TK g me Oy 4) ‘9 

i cea rae | a et 

twit , ‘ Crh Saal ® is te arr Winey a) go ey Mn oy me! is 
yen Neo, hts 4 et te 





Date Due 


= Sane ee 














; fag x | 


, A fart A 
ep) SIM LINEAL ‘ 7 
Hea aan ey 
se i ae aba 


ie by ay y 


gi a by 


i 
GAY TA 


Ui 


‘a 


Bie 
. 


We an oh i, 
if NH 
rita A ae 
ae SAS Dan Ys 


‘ ¥ ae t 


Ww 

Day 

® wd 
eee 
A Le 


’ 





ia 





on 


] 


